Expectation on Air to Air missiles of the MiG-29A?

[pepin1234]

12 minutes ago, okopanja said:

1. Everyone know that breaking a lock on flanker/fulcrum ib DCS is easy.

2. Real Su-27SK manual states with single sentence that relock is not possible.

3. Even when relock was possible it had limitted practical use

4. RWRs in western jets as implenented now are too precise in terms of azimuth. This is what makes it so easy to dump R-27ER

RWR on F-15E is not that precise or fast reaction in maneuvers, seem to be more on the real thing what those guys made. The ED western RWR are magical.

You are misunderstanding relock with Notch. I'm talking about a Notch with a solid lock not too long distance. Yeah, everyone know how defeat the Aim-120, I will not go to the F-16 forum missiles to give that explanation. Sound gross and disrespectful. 

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, pepin1234 said:

You give tips to defeat the Mig-29A... you just forget mention the R-27 missile doesn't came back to guidance after the enemy leave the notch maneuver, such its wrong simulation behavior, Notch could take about one sec or two most of the time. The Russian missile become a miss after a single short notch WRONG!!  AIM-7 do reacquire guidance very well so that issue is for ED. Have been so for quite long, make it an easy defeat to any Russian missiles.

If it’s so wrong, what says what behavior of R-27 after loosing lock beyond 3s memory time should be? 

[pepin1234]

5 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

If it’s so wrong, what says what behavior of R-27 after loosing lock beyond 3s memory time should be? 

No, it's not. Make a test and if the opponent get a solid efective notch for a while, that R-27 is missed. 

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, pepin1234 said:

No, it's not. Make a test and if the opponent get a solid efective notch for a while, that R-27 is missed. 

Yes, that’s what happens in DCS and should be roughly similar to reality. I was just wondering what makes you so passionate that it’s “WRONG”

[okopanja]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

Yes, that’s what happens in DCS and should be roughly similar to reality. I was just wondering what makes you so passionate that it’s “WRONG”

Well one thing that occurred to me is that different manuals may differ in terms of content. E.g. limitations may be not only because of the technical reasons, but rather organizational and requirements from each air force.

It would be curious to see if this R-27 limitation is applicable to Mig-29 at all (surely the same sentence would be in the manual). Strictly speaking reason for no re-locking is possible is the fact that Su-27SK radar starts with new parameters and synchronization does not take place, e.g. it does not continue as before the lock was lost.

Edited January 19 by okopanja

[pepin1234]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

Yes, that’s what happens in DCS and should be roughly similar to reality. I was just wondering what makes you so passionate that it’s “WRONG”

You are the only is mentioned lock missed. its way different than have a notch. Can you get that now?

[okopanja]

4 hours ago, pepin1234 said:

You are the only is mentioned lock missed. its way different than have a notch. Can you get that now?

No really, but lets make it clear if you loose lock for what ever reasons you will not be able to recover R-27.

I am wondering if this problem was solved at some later time IRL, especially of other manuals to do not state this. And yes there are differences between manuals.

Edited January 19 by okopanja

[Viper33]

7 hours ago, pepin1234 said:

You are the only is mentioned lock missed. its way different than have a notch. Can you get that now?

I am really struggling to decipher what you are trying to say here. Can you at least try to form a proper and coherent sentence in English? If you can't then please type it out in your native language and use google translate as I am sure this will have better results. 

Now, to get back to the specifics of the N019 radar and R-27R operation. The radar switches in intervals of 20,48ms and 30,72ms between illumination and radio correction (IL - RC - IL - RC). A full radiocorrection cycle for one missile requires 358,2ms. If during that time the interval is interrupted (lock is lost) there is no way for the radar to recover it as it does not have a track based memory system (there is a short memory period where the radar tries to re-establsish a lock) nor does the missile have smart enough electronics to extrapolate a track outside of the last received RC command. As for the AIM-7's, in particular the newer variants they do have INS and the illuminating radars often enough have a track memory based architecture as well as CW illumination should a lock be dropped. Either way even a Sparrow should be trashed if the lock is dropped for a sufficient enough period of time - no idea how this currently works in DCS though so maybe there is something to be corrected either way. 

Edited January 19 by Viper33

[pepin1234]

24 minutes ago, Viper33 said:

I am really struggling to decipher what you are trying to say here. Can you at least try to form a proper and coherent sentence in English? If you can't then please type it out in your native language and use google translate as I am sure this will have better results. 

Now, to get back to the specifics of the N019 radar and R-27R operation. The radar switches in intervals of 30,72ms between illumination and radio correction (IL - RC - IL - RC). A full radiocorrection cycle for one missile requires 358,2ms. If during that time the interval is interrupted (lock is lost) there is no way for the radar to recover it as it does not have a track based memory system (there is a short memory period where the radar tries to re-establsish a lock) nor does the missile have smart enough electronics to extrapolate a track outside of the last received RC command. As for the AIM-7's, in particular the newer variants they do have INS and the illuminating radars often enough have a track memory based architecture as well as CW illumination should a lock be dropped. Either way even a Sparrow should be trashed if the lock is dropped for a sufficient enough period of time - no idea how this currently works in DCS though so maybe there is something to be corrected either way. 

我真的很難理解你在這裡想說的內容。你至少能嘗試用英語組成一個正確且連貫的句子嗎？如果您不能，請用您的母語輸入並使用Google翻譯，因為我相信這會有更好的結果。

現在，回到 N019 雷達和 R-27R 操作的細節。雷達以 30.72 毫秒的間隔在照明和無線電校正 (IL - RC - IL - RC) 之間切換。一枚飛彈的完整無線電校正週期需要 358.2 毫秒。如果在此期間間隔中斷（鎖定丟失），則雷達無法恢復它，因為它沒有基於軌蹟的存儲系統（雷達嘗試重新建立鎖定的時間很短） ）導彈也沒有足夠智能的電子設備來推斷最後收到的RC 命令之外的軌跡。至於 AIM-7，特別是較新的型號，它們確實具有 INS 和照明雷達，通常具有基於追蹤記憶體的架構以及 CW 照明（如果鎖定失敗）。不管怎樣，如果鎖被丟棄足夠長的時間，即使是麻雀也應該被扔掉——不知道目前在 DCS 中是如何工作的，所以也許有一些東西需要糾正。

[okopanja]

1 hour ago, Viper33 said:

Now, to get back to the specifics of the N019 radar and R-27R operation. The radar switches in intervals of 30,72ms between illumination and radio correction (IL - RC - IL - RC). A full radiocorrection cycle for one missile requires 358,2ms. If during that time the interval is interrupted (lock is lost) there is no way for the radar to recover it as it does not have a track based memory system (there is a short memory period where the radar tries to re-establsish a lock) nor does the missile have smart enough electronics to extrapolate a track outside of the last received RC command.

Fascinating, could you please shed more light on this, perhaps with some block diagrams and time based signal diagrams?

Would be also interesting to see this for following cases:

1. radio correction segment of flight

2. SARH being activated

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

2 hours ago, Viper33 said:

no idea how this currently works in DCS though

If you're quick enough with re-acquiring the target, a Sparrow can pick the target back up - but you only have a few seconds.
From what I gather the R-27 family is significantly less advanced than the Sparrow (due to analogue electronics?) so I'm not surprised it can't do that.

[AeriaGloria]

7 hours ago, okopanja said:

No really, but lets make it clear if you loose lock for what ever reasons you will not be able to recover R-27.

I am wondering if this problem was solved at some later time IRL, especially of other manuals to do not state this. And yes there are differences between manuals.

 

There is a MiG-29 manual that says if R-27 lock is lost, you should enter BVR search and point the radar at the target in the last ditch hope that the target is illuminated for the missile. 
 

It used to be possible in DCS, I would have fun firing a R-27 and having it guide, then drop lock for a few seconds, then regain it for terminal phase. Would be fun to make the target think weird things from STT missile launch going on and off. Alas it is unrealistic

 

[Viper33]

13 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

There is a MiG-29 manual that says if R-27 lock is lost, you should enter BVR search and point the radar at the target in the last ditch hope that the target is illuminated for the missile. 
 

It used to be possible in DCS, I would have fun firing a R-27 and having it guide, then drop lock for a few seconds, then regain it for terminal phase. Would be fun to make the target think weird things from STT missile launch going on and off. Alas it is unrealistic

 

Sounds very niche for when the missile is basically almost close to impact. In all other cases the target parameters are not changed and the missile will fly according to the last known command. You'd need a constant target illumination unlike the periodic sweep a BVR search provides. May work against bombers that aren't turning much. 

Edited January 19 by Viper33

[AeriaGloria]

33 minutes ago, Viper33 said:

Sounds very niche for when the missile is basically almost close to impact. In all other cases the target parameters are not changed and the missile will fly according to the last known command. You'd need a constant target illumination unlike the periodic sweep a BVR search provides. May work against bombers that aren't turning much. 

 

Yes, one advantage the R-27 has over R-24R, 11m vs 6m fuse and 39 kg warhead vs 34 kg

EDIT: ED files has 25 if so I thought difference was larger, but just looked up real world manual which says 34 kg

Edited January 19 by AeriaGloria

[Harlikwin]

On 1/16/2024 at 9:37 PM, pepin1234 said:

IRST is not only for dogfighting… if you are a twin engine you will generate more heat. Also for F-16 single is a pretty big powerful engine to be compared with the tiny MiG-21, so F-16 is not that stealth on that regard. So you will be detected from a long distance. As you maneuver side to the IRST sensor you will show the hot side of your engine and R-27T/ET should effectively hit you even when you are maneuvering low on afterburner. 
 

another misconception is people tell the R-27T should be launched first to avoid the previous rocket burst. That’s not 100% correct.

RU fighter can launch the T variant as second launch, just need to make dive banking maneuver before second T be on the way. 

 

Brother, the amount misinformation on IR stuff in general in DCS and especially in DCS is huge.

The numbers for the KOLS that Aria posted are accurate. It was never meant to be some long range IRST system. Those ranges drop further if the target background is clouds or the ground by about half. We have RL 29 pilots testifying to the fact it was basically useless outside of BFM ranges (Where it did do well, because thats what it was designed to do). 

Big engine doesn't matter. Aspect angle, and total solid angle are what actually matters, and to a lesser extent if the target is supersonic or not. For "long rage detection" afterburner can't even be seen as the CO2 lines are rapidly absorbed (it does matter at short ranges because it takes a few km of atmosphere to absorb it all). And how this simple, literal IR 101 fact is lost on pretty much every dev amazes me. But maybe it shouldn't. 

Also how "hot" you think something is also wrong, because turns out different sensor see different energies in the spectrum based on the detector chemistry. Thats the first mistake most people make about IR. 

 

31 minutes ago, Viper33 said:

Sounds very niche for when the missile is basically almost close to impact. In all other cases the target parameters are not changed and the missile will fly according to the last known command. You'd need a constant target illumination unlike the periodic sweep a BVR search provides. May work against bombers that aren't turning much. 

 

Its entirely like the "flood" mode on western jets. It is what it is. 

[Viper33]

57 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Yes, one advantage the R-27 has over R-24R, 11m vs 6m fuse and 39 kg warhead vs 34 kg

EDIT: ED files has 25 if so I thought difference was larger, but just looked up real world manual which says 34 kg

 

Yeah DCS numbers may be compensating for how thigns work in the game itself. Will be interesting to see the rework or have more info on it. 

[AeriaGloria]

24 minutes ago, Viper33 said:

Yeah DCS numbers may be compensating for how thigns work in the game itself. Will be interesting to see the rework or have more info on it. 

The confusion could also come from that R-23 had a 24-26 kg warhead. So it’s increased for R-24 in an unexpectedly large amount. R-27 is really more refinement and evolution then advancing revolution…… 

[Ramius007]

it's all not that importaant, becouse HOJ mode is real killer, passive anti radation weapons are UFO technology in DCS, both SARH passive mode and Harms like weapons, only Shrikes on Skyhawks work more or less how they should IRL (~25% effectivness)

[Harlikwin]

20 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

it's all not that importaant, becouse HOJ mode is real killer, passive anti radation weapons are UFO technology in DCS, both SARH passive mode and Harms like weapons, only Shrikes on Skyhawks work more or less how they should IRL (~25% effectivness)

Passive anti-radiation modeling is a fairly complex thing, and honestly IDK how well its done in DCS. 

[Viper33]

20 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Passive anti-radiation modeling is a fairly complex thing, and honestly IDK how well its done in DCS. 

Not well at all. 

[Ignition]

On 1/19/2024 at 6:26 PM, Ramius007 said:

it's all not that importaant, becouse HOJ mode is real killer, passive anti radation weapons are UFO technology in DCS, both SARH passive mode and Harms like weapons, only Shrikes on Skyhawks work more or less how they should IRL (~25% effectivness)

HARMS  in real life 99% of the time didn't destroy their target because there are SAM operators unlike in DCS. HARMS are VERY precise in real life.

[Ramius007]

10 hours ago, Ignition said:

HARMS  in real life 99% of the time didn't destroy their target because there are SAM operators unlike in DCS. HARMS are VERY precise in real life.

99% of the time? pls give me a link to your source, Retheon official page dont count  I can give you source to statment that 700+ fired ARM's killed 3 radars in Yugoslavia, and yes, they were turning of radars, not having this at least as option for AI put sirious scratch on DCS "study level sim" lebel

Speaking about HOJ in SARH missiles, given efficiency of this mode in DCS, it should be a viable IRL combat tactic to fire SARH on jammer and go cold, somehow I never heard about any aerial kill this way in history of aviation, in DCS missiles in HOJ are more effective than they are against chaffing/flaring targets.

 

[Ignition]

3 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

99% of the time? pls give me a link to your source, Retheon official page dont count  I can give you source to statment that 700+ fired ARM's killed 3 radars in Yugoslavia, and yes, they were turning of radars, not having this at least as option for AI put sirious scratch on DCS "study level sim" lebel

 

That's what I've said.

[okopanja]

6 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

99% of the time? pls give me a link to your source, Retheon official page dont count  I can give you source to statment that 700+ fired ARM's killed 3 radars in Yugoslavia, and yes, they were turning of radars, not having this at least as option for AI put sirious scratch on DCS "study level sim" lebel

Speaking about HOJ in SARH missiles, given efficiency of this mode in DCS, it should be a viable IRL combat tactic to fire SARH on jammer and go cold, somehow I never heard about any aerial kill this way in history of aviation, in DCS missiles in HOJ are more effective than they are against chaffing/flaring targets.

 

You should go ask Vietnam era pilots, since they were the first ones encountering this, namely from SAMs. Since than it's more or less standard feature - you get a clean and stable signal much higher than your own radar would provide, with downside of range being a subject of estimate. As for the HARMs in Yugoslavia they killed more than 3 radars, but even then efficiency was way lower than in priod conflicts, where it's efficiency was high. In DCS this is sat to pretty high value, but mostly to the fact that SAMs in DCS do not take into account risk of HARM being utilized against them, and not having additional passive and active measures that can further degrade the efficiency.

In DCS, older aircraft have less advanced jammers. Newer offer you different modes, including those where HOJ is not sufficiently effective.

[Ramius007]

going of topic now, and stop with this post, but Shrikes in A-4 are preety well modelled, curious if Phantom improve current picture, but i said already, game should give us option to turn on system like IADS, or at least training setting should affect SAM's behavior, further options like really integreted SAM network should be another option in mission editor or just difficulty setting, propably only in editor. In general, if we are getting battlefield simulation on par with current systems moddeling, then there is no point of those systems moddeling on modules in the first place, it's just performance hit for no gains.

Edited January 28 by Ramius007