Air to Air Missile Flight Physics and Logics, Take two!

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

because in Indian Air Force's site says the R-77 has a rangeMAX of 100km, R-27TE of 130km and R-27RE of 70km! I too want the R-73RDM2 which has an upgraded seeker, a rangeMAX of 40km and speed of mach 4! :lol:

R-73 ... 40 km?! Very funny, as is the R-27TE = 130 km ... what a crock. :D

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Well, it's absolutely true you know ... if you drop'em from orbit. ;D

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

On preventing a notch: ...

Nah, it’s Doppler notch, i.e. its about reducing relative velocities between the moving radar and the moving target so there is minimal Doppler shift difference in the EM return compared to the original EM emission. It means to approach as close to zero differential velocity as can be arranged, so that the attack radar's noise and clutter filtering algorithms are likely to interpret your returns as noise, and thus disregard your returns as a valid contact.

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

EDIT: I should also add, this could however allow ECM to exploit the situation though, and thus compromise/confuse the attacking radar.

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

Well, it's absolutely true you know ... if you drop'em from orbit. ;D

Yeah, they really should be a LOT more careful what 'info' they place on their website, if that is the case ... :wink:

Sharpshooter · February 23, 2005

I´m against ED getting the 120C better it´s already killer, I get only but kills in no escape zone.

Nah, I had Su-30s defeating AIM-120s in 1.1 last night between 3-6 nm range. As always, decoys, altitudes, maneuvers and approach aspects mean there is no such thing as a true 'no-escape zone'.

No escape zone menas for me that if launched head on to a target that is not currently maneuvering at the moment and is same altitude as you, it will hit 90% of the times. To sum up, fired in optimal conditions.

If however you try to fire them to recceding targets or targets not exactly in front of you, but rather 45 degrees or more to your left or right the chances of kill are likely to drop. Particulary I think that firing multiple AMRAAMs is not the best tactic, if thats what you are doing.

Maybe the AIM-120 is undermodeled, but I still think that is a missile that in the game has an above 65% Pk if it`s fired correctly. You see that I agree with you when you said, it`s not the missile but the pilot who is responsable for the kill. Though with this kind of missiles, it doesn´t take much of a pilot to make a kill.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Uh ... they're pretty easy to dodge, dude.

Anyway. The 120 in teh A version had a .75pk.

And the no escape zon has a SPECIFIC meaning that has nothing to do with what it means to you.

Specificlaly it means a head on engagement where the target then performs a 6-g turn to evade the missile.

SwingKid · February 23, 2005

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

Source?

-SK

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

Yeah ... I hear the SAMs now will head high and then dive onto the target, which should fix a numebr of problems.

Unfortunately not against a low-level target they don't, I watched it last night and the Buks still fly a basically flat trajectory against low-level targets - that's why they are so easy to energy defeat.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Noticed the same ... :/

Sharpshooter · February 23, 2005

Uh ... they're pretty easy to dodge, dude.

Anyway. The 120 in teh A version had a .75pk.

And the no escape zon has a SPECIFIC meaning that has nothing to do with what it means to you.

Specificlaly it means a head on engagement where the target then performs a 6-g turn to evade the missile.

Let´s make it easier for everyone. You do at least two tracks where you defeat an AIM-120C fired at let´s say 8nm.

I know I have done everything you said and came up with different results. I tried defeating it from 8nm, 10nm, anyway at ranges where it´s energy it´s very high. I´ve managed to succeed few times and it made me turn my tail and be the chased one. The only one I know tha works and doesn´t make you turn your tail is driving the missile to the ground.

I also tried with an Excelent Su-30 to see if he could do something. From twenty kilometers and closer ranges he got slammed every time, with good firing parameters (the eagle pilot wasn´t doing nothing funny just ponting his nose and thus missiles directly at the target). I tried two Su-30s, and then 4, all the missiles that the F-15 fired hit.

The no escape zone has specific parameters I know. But for that zone to work the pilot has to know how to use it, he doesn´t just pull the trigger. You can´t just pull the trigger at any situation an go saying "Hey ! The no escape zone is BS !!!" (I´m not saying you did)

D-Scythe · February 23, 2005

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

No, it isn't impossible. The tactic of beaming radars have been around for a very long time, and was widely used in the 'secret' ACE/AIMVAL missile tests in the 1970s by Red Air pilots in F-5s to defeat their more powerful F-14 and F-15 opponents. However, from accounts I've read of pilots who've beamed/been beamed in the F-15, notch is over-modelled in Lock On. From the general picture I've put together, even the vanilla APG-63 has a range in which beaming would no longer be effective. For example, the Red Air F-5s in the 1970s ACE/AIMVAL discovered that trying to hide in the notch of the APG-63 was only effective up to a certain point - probably some range between 6-10 miles (guess by me, as results of exercise are classified). These are the top, best of the best pilots in the U.S. Armed Forces - ACE/AIMVAL was huge - trying to notch in a relatively low RCS jet (the F-5), and it didn't work. In Desert Storm, a pair of MiG-25s hid in the notch whilst BVR during an engagment with F-15s, breaking lock. However, when the F-15s reaqcuired the MiGs visually and re-engaged, the -25s tried to beam again, but the radar held lock and both Foxbats were splashed with a volley of AIM-7s.

In LO-MAC, beaming works all the way down to gun range. I'm not SwingKid, but personally I don't think that's realistic. Beaming should work - but only up to a certain range.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Which tells me you're simply doing something wrong.

The 120 as modelled in LOMAC is -easily- defeated at 8nm, and I won't be the only here who tells you that.

It just requires a bit more effort and precition. ;) And no, I won't be making any tracks ... but then obviously you don't have to take my word for it.

Show up on the 44th TS sometime and I'll tell you all about it though.

Sharpshooter · February 23, 2005

because in Indian Air Force's site says the R-77 has a rangeMAX of 100km, R-27TE of 130km and R-27RE of 70km! I too want the R-73RDM2 which has an upgraded seeker, a rangeMAX of 40km and speed of mach 4! :lol:

R-73 ... 40 km?! Very funny, as is the R-27TE = 130 km ... what a crock. :D

Well I guess that if you set up a drone that flyes head on towards the aicraft at 3500Km/h and that has a huge heat source installed in it´s fuselage(probably lots of flares) and the aircraft is doing normal speed, then I think you could get the R-73 in LockOn to get a signal at that range and intercept the drone.

What is strange is the R-27TE, not even the world´s most powreful heat seeker could lock on an atomic bomb at that range (I´m going crazy), so it might indicate that it has somekind of Datalink :), or it might indicate that it was fired blind hoping to intercept a target.

February 23, 2005

because in Indian Air Force's site says the R-77 has a rangeMAX of 100km, R-27TE of 130km and R-27RE of 70km! I too want the R-73RDM2 which has an upgraded seeker, a rangeMAX of 40km and speed of mach 4! :lol:

R-73 ... 40 km?! Very funny, as is the R-27TE = 130 km ... what a crock. :D

You should read it carefuly: R-73RDM2

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircraft/Missiles/index.html

In case you didn't bother to read all the posts, I'm just making fun of merrikans, especially the ones claiming the R-77 is - far - inferior to the AIM-120, asking for an uber AMRAAM with rangeMAX of 70km to counter the R-27RE. :lol: So all I'm asking for is an uber R-77 and R-27XX, like that interweb site says. :roll:

By the way, in another forum I posted a challenge for teh merrikans to prove their - absolutely non sense moronic - theory that the R-77 is inferior.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

The TE was meant to run down either a non-maneuvering heavy aircraft (liek a bomber) or an escaping aircraft that the 73 couldn't catch up with.

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

Particulary I think that firing multiple AMRAAMs is not the best tactic, if thats what you are doing.

Nope, I was using just one pitbull launched AIM-120 in the air at a time against the lead Su-30s (there were two, one trailing several miles), The first pitbull missile missed the closest Su but the second missile killed it, however the second Su-30 manoeuvred aggressively against the AIM-120 and lost it while dumping decoys, but once the Su had finished its missile avoidance turns it was now facing toward me more squarely :!: ... once I saw the AIM-120 miss I launched an AIM-9M at about 2.5 nm range, head to head, but the Su got off an R-73 a second later. I was super-sonic with full tanks and externals so couldn't turn (I had just topped up the tanks), and he was in an energy sink from the turns and could not escape, so we both got hit

(yeah, should have dropped external tanks but the Su's were going after my tanker and getting very close to launch distance ... :shock: )

Sharpshooter · February 23, 2005

Which tells me you're simply doing something wrong.
The 120 as modelled in LOMAC is -easily- defeated at 8nm, and I won't be the only here who tells you that.

It just requires a bit more effort and precition. ;) And no, I won't be making any tracks ... but then obviously you don't have to take my word for it.

Show up on the 44th TS sometime and I'll tell you all about it though.

I´m not saying you can´t, only that if you do you end up in a position that you wouldn´t want to be into, you´ll get splashed anyway. I say if an eagle pilot has 120s and you are like 20km from him you have 20% chances of surviving, provided he knows were you are and he is somewhat trained. All this counting that you still don´t have a missile in the air, if you do you could splash him, but he´ll splash you to.

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

Source?

-SK

err, I thought I made it fairly clear;

"practically impossible", i.e meaning in actual practice; and "I think this...", i.e. meaning I was stating an opinion about the likelihood of making this work in practice"

To me that overall technique looks to be a high probability recipe for getting shotdown in short order.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Nope, completely untrue. Two aircraft can merge, none of their actives ever having found a target.

HOWEVER. You'll never see me nose-on with an enemy aircraft, being fired on, and not having fired back, so please delete that assumption - it would only happen due to surprise or sleeping on the job, and both are fairly rare.

You can ocnsistently have a high survival rate -jsut- by applying the correct techniques at the right time ... to give you an example, I got into a tiff with a fully loaded MiG-29S. I only had a pair of 9's left (he dodged my one remaining amraam) so I fired one head on at farther range than I would have licked, then we proceeded to merge ... he had fired 4 missiles that failed to hit me, I was diving for the sea, backed out. Anyway, I pulled out, didn't know whre he was, checked six (when in doubt, check six) and hey, there he is, RIGHT there ... he fires his last 73 ... I dodge it, roll him, gun kill.

That's a circumstantial example though, and obviously things don't always happen this way. Still, point is, you can ensure your survival by doing the right thing at the right time.

Anyway ... back to ballistics. ;D

Sharpshooter · February 23, 2005

Particulary I think that firing multiple AMRAAMs is not the best tactic, if thats what you are doing.

Nope, I was using just one pitbull launched AIM-120 in the air at a time against the lead Su-30s (there were two, one trailing several miles), The first pitbull missile missed the closest Su but the second missile killed it, however the second Su-30 manoeuvred aggressively against the AIM-120 and lost it while dumping decoys, but once the Su had finished its missile avoidance turns it was now facing toward me more squarely :!: ... once I saw the AIM-120 miss I launched an AIM-9M at about 2.5 nm range, head to head, but the Su got off an R-73 a second later. I was super-sonic with full tanks and externals so couldn't turn (I had just topped up the tanks), and he was in an energy sink from the turns and could not escape, so we both got hit

(yeah, should have dropped external tanks but the Su's were going after my tanker and getting very close to launch distance ... :shock: )

Finally some actual eivdence.

Range when you fired your first 120 ? Aspect ? You mean pitbull as radar lock, then seeker going active then drop lock ?, or you mean maddog, 120 fired without radar lock ?

All I could say is with a plain head on the F-15 always wins.

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

Which tells me you're simply doing something wrong.
The 120 as modelled in LOMAC is -easily- defeated at 8nm, and I won't be the only here who tells you that.

It just requires a bit more effort and precition. ;) And no, I won't be making any tracks ... but then obviously you don't have to take my word for it.

Show up on the 44th TS sometime and I'll tell you all about it though.

I´m not saying you can´t, only that if you do you end up in a position that you wouldn´t want to be into, you´ll get splashed anyway. I say if an eagle pilot has 120s and you are like 20km from him you have 20% chances of surviving, provided he knows were you are and he is somewhat trained. All this counting that you still don´t have a missile in the air, if you do you could splash him, but he´ll splash you to.

Yes, inside 20 km the AIM-120 had a good PK, but only if you keep coming on against it, If you don't you can trash it EASY.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

Source?

-SK

err, I thought I made it fairly clear;

"practically impossible", i.e meaning in actual practice; and "I think this...", i.e. meaning I was stating an opinion about the likelihood of making this work in practice"

To me that overall technique looks to be a high probability recipe for getting shotdown in short order.

There was a gulf war incident where an F-15C got notched by a Mirage, so he was coming down in a panic in autoguns trying to find it ... I saw this along time ago, the source seemed fairly credible, but I'm not going to hunt for it ;)

Seems liek this is indeed practical ... especially in circumstances where a quick notch can take you out of the scan zone and make the other guy sweat - remember, he's flying more or less level so he can't actually see you ... otherwise, things change.

GGTharos · February 23, 2005

Particulary I think that firing multiple AMRAAMs is not the best tactic, if thats what you are doing.

Nope, I was using just one pitbull launched AIM-120 in the air at a time against the lead Su-30s (there were two, one trailing several miles), The first pitbull missile missed the closest Su but the second missile killed it, however the second Su-30 manoeuvred aggressively against the AIM-120 and lost it while dumping decoys, but once the Su had finished its missile avoidance turns it was now facing toward me more squarely :!: ... once I saw the AIM-120 miss I launched an AIM-9M at about 2.5 nm range, head to head, but the Su got off an R-73 a second later. I was super-sonic with full tanks and externals so couldn't turn (I had just topped up the tanks), and he was in an energy sink from the turns and could not escape, so we both got hit

(yeah, should have dropped external tanks but the Su's were going after my tanker and getting very close to launch distance ... :shock: )

Finally some actual eivdence.

Range when you fired your first 120 ? Aspect ? You mean pitbull as radar lock, then seeker going active then drop lock ?, or you mean maddog, 120 fired without radar lock ?

All I could say is with a plain head on the F-15 always wins.

Look man, this is simply untrue. Go online and fly an F-15, throw AMRAAMs at people. Most will get blown up when you launch inside of 10nm, but you'll find a bunch of guys out there who'll trash it every time and slap you with an ET or something.

The AI isn't smart enough to do what a player can.

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

All I could say is with a plain head on the F-15 always wins.

All I can say is that you seriously need to adopt some new missile avoidance techniques if that’s the case for you. :wink:

zzzspace · February 23, 2005

It’s practically impossible to fly, let alone to fool a modern A-A radar to filter you out. Personally, I think this is an interesting theoretical possibility only, and not an actual flyable practical countering technique.

Source?

-SK

err, I thought I made it fairly clear;

"practically impossible", i.e meaning in actual practice; and "I think this...", i.e. meaning I was stating an opinion about the likelihood of making this work in practice"

To me that overall technique looks to be a high probability recipe for getting shotdown in short order.

There was a gulf war incident where an F-15C got notched by a Mirage, so he was coming down in a panic in autoguns trying to find it ... I saw this along time ago, the source seemed fairly credible, but I'm not going to hunt for it ;)
Seems liek this is indeed practical ... especially in circumstances where a quick notch can take you out of the scan zone and make the other guy sweat - remember, he's flying more or less level so he can't actually see you ... otherwise, things change.

LOL, yeah ... and who shotdown who in that encounter?

Sign In

Air to Air Missile Flight Physics and Logics, Take two!

Recommended Posts

zzzspace

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

GGTharos

zzzspace

zzzspace

Sharpshooter

GGTharos

SwingKid

zzzspace

GGTharos

Sharpshooter

D-Scythe

GGTharos

Sharpshooter

Guest DeathAngelBR

GGTharos

zzzspace

Sharpshooter

zzzspace

GGTharos

Sharpshooter

zzzspace

GGTharos

GGTharos

zzzspace

zzzspace

Recently Browsing 0 members