Jump to content

AIM-120 Blink jamming and chaff causes spectacular tracking failure


Default774

Recommended Posts

A combination of blink jamming and large amounts of chaff cause a consistently repeatable tracking failure in the AIM-120. The missile will lose tracking and go stupid around 2-3nm away from the target in the terminal phase if the target is blink jamming and dropping chaff. As soon as chaffing or blink jamming stops, the missile has a chance to reacquire, but often does not. 

Blink jamming was performed with an autohotkey script rapidly blinking the jammer, but this is also possible manually on any other module that features an instantly toggleable jammer. Chaff was manually dispensed with cms left.

This is maybe also possible on modules that natively feature blink jamming, however I own neither the M2000C or F-14, so I am unable to check this.

120cbl.gif

 

120_cbl_5.acmi 120_cbl_4.acmi 120_cbl_3.acmi 120_cbl_2.acmi 120_cbl_1.acmi 120_cbl_5.trk 120_cbl_4.trk 120_cbl_3.trk 120_cbl_2.trk 120_cbl_1.trk

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Default774 said:

...
Blink jamming was performed with an autohotkey script rapidly blinking the jammer, but this is also possible manually on any other module that features an instantly toggleable jammer. ...

 

This is why FC3 jammers have a "warm up" period.

i5-4690K CPU 3.50Ghz @ 4.10GHz; 32GB DDR3 1600MHz; GeForce GTX 1660 Super; LG IPS225@1920x1080; Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1TB; Windows 10 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
37 minutes ago, gortex said:

We've been wondering why it is suddenly so easy to trash the Aim-120 on Growling Sidewinder.  This helps explain it.  Thanks.

Can this bug be confirmed or do we need more tracks?

All AIM-120 related reports have been getting effectively ignored for the past few months, not sure why, probably something internal.

I think there's already plenty of tracks for this issue. If I find any more interesting behaviour I'll be sure to add it here later.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SchumiF399 said:

AMRAAM is a joke nowadays half the shots I fire ended up in the AMRAAM having an effing seizure.

I know you've probably heard this a million times before but do you have any tracks/tacviews/videos? If you have tacviews/videos I will try to reproduce it myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Hi all, 

we already have reports open for this but you will need to be patient. 

thank you

  • Like 1

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

No, not Heatblur made that decision, but most probably Grumman.

 

The time they designed the Tomcat and the respective EW suit (even though I bet it was later updated), they thought: "Hey, there will be a game in a couple of decades featuring our planned plane, would it not be fun to screw with the people of the future by one of our design ideas?" so they developed a blinking jammer, just to fool the DCS crowd.

No other reason that I can think of to design something like that. 

 

< irony off >

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AirMeister said:

So heatblur thought "hey this is a good idea let's make this exploit an F14 feature!" ... ? 
Just been flying since a long time and all amraams go stupid vs F14 now . 

@IronMike
 

 

The mirage 2000 jammer has the same forcefield effect. Removing blink from in game jammers is a bandaid fix, it is the wrong place to look. Removing blink jamming from mirage and F-14 will not stop my autohotkey script

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right way to deal with it is have the receiver deal with blink jamming as it would have to do IRL.  Alternatively require ECM to be active for x amount of time before it affects the receiver (so, not a warm up of the ECM like we have in FC3 but rather the receiver is 'numb' to it for the first 1-2 sec) - and while this won't negate blinking (not that it necessarily should negate that) it will make it less effective, ie. not a force-field or guaranteed miss.  This could be tuned to achieve the desired result.  It could even be player/server tunable and enforceable, allowing some variance in ECM capability (today, this side or aircraft or system has the upper hand etc)


Edited by GGTharos
  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or remove ECM completely until it's done better. Personally I would love to see some randomness in ECM effects as well as ECM affecting AWACS/EWR and SAMs. At the moment it does nothing more but deny you range information, but this can be easily worked around using DL or GCI.

  • Like 3

i5-4690K CPU 3.50Ghz @ 4.10GHz; 32GB DDR3 1600MHz; GeForce GTX 1660 Super; LG IPS225@1920x1080; Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1TB; Windows 10 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...