Aim54c Performance

[Tblue282]

Has something changed here since the update a couple weeks ago?  I occasionally do a little BVR mission 1v2 against some su27s.  The phoenix suddenly is almost useless outside of 10 miles.  The slightest turn left and recommit on the SU-27s part and they are completely defeated.   They don’t even work well enough for a posturing shot to be effective?   I went from rarely losing to rarely winning lol.  Has anyone else noticed anything ?  Maybe I got rusty 

[BubiHUN]

Just accept the fact that Hitblurr just nerfing the F-14s main weapon hoping people will buy F-4 instead. 
Its been nerfed since about 2 years. Nothing new here

[Tblue282]

3 minutes ago, BubiHUN said:

Just accept the fact that Hitblurr just nerfing the F-14s main weapon hoping people will buy F-4 instead. 
Its been nerfed since about 2 years. Nothing new here

 

3 minutes ago, BubiHUN said:

Just accept the fact that Hitblurr just nerfing the F-14s main weapon hoping people will buy F-4 instead. 
Its been nerfed since about 2 years. Nothing new here

Hahahahahaha   Possible 

[MAXsenna]

Just accept the fact that Hitblurr just nerfing the F-14s main weapon hoping people will buy F-4 instead. 
Its been nerfed since about 2 years. Nothing new here

And here I thought ED was in charge of weapons...

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[BubiHUN]

4 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

And here I thought ED was in charge of weapons

They both ED and HB pointing at each other about this case. 
I think its obvious.

[MAXsenna]

They both ED and HB pointing at each other about this case. 
I think its obvious.

I see.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[NeedzWD40]

My experience hasn't changed much; that is, if a bandit turns and runs, it won't catch them, and if they're very vicious in maneuvering they can potentially bleed it out of juice if they're in denser air. On the other hand, if they stay above 20,000ft and keep flying toward the missile (even if maneuvering), they tend to get caught by it regardless. Depending on the threat, I'm engaging from 30-40nmi if they're >30,000ft, trimming that down if they're closer to the deck. I'm mostly doing RWS + STT due to TWS being generally unreliable against fighter targets unless they're really spaced out and the airspace isn't cluttered.

If a target is on the deck, then even a high-speed, high-alt launch will result in a pretty slow missile down low, so in those instances I'm holding my shots til ~20nmi if at all possible. A shot I made this evening on a transport on the deck from 50nmi had the missile impact at 450KTAS, so anything that can turn around quickly on the deck is going to outrun it. On the other hand, there was a Flanker that went co-alt at 35,000ft and he couldn't dodge a shot from 35nmi. It's pretty variable depending on the situation and I wouldn't really take long shots unless I knew the target was going to be cooperative or I was trying to get them to do something else.

YMMV of course, but 1000lb brick is 1000lb brick.

[Billy]

Possibly AI logic/difficulty changed, making them defeat missiles more easily. I remember them barrel rolling much more, you can check Tacview to see what they did. Against players I don't hope for a hit outside of ~5nm

[Comstedt86]

7 hours ago, Billy said:

Possibly AI logic/difficulty changed, making them defeat missiles more easily. I remember them barrel rolling much more, you can check Tacview to see what they did. Against players I don't hope for a hit outside of ~5nm

I don't dare to ask what your employment range for the Sidewinder is. 

Even on airquake we've reliably hit players at ranges 50-65nm last few days.

If vs AI, try reducing skill level.

 

[draconus]

On 4/20/2024 at 4:07 PM, Tblue282 said:

I occasionally do a little BVR mission 1v2 against some su27s.

Can you share the mission? We could test.

[PD919]

I think people need to accept that the Phoenix is not nearly as accurate as an AIM-120.  It's better to launch it from a high altitude.  I would say it takes two AIM-54s to down a bandit.  Sometimes you need to go in with the Sparrow.

[Billy]

14 hours ago, Comstedt86 said:

I don't dare to ask what your employment range for the Sidewinder is. 

Even on airquake we've reliably hit players at ranges 50-65nm last few days.

If vs AI, try reducing skill level.

 

I do BVR in private servers or small-scale team airquakes, I stopped getting consistent long-range Phoenix kills after everyone died to a 60-mile shot at least once (should still shoot to force some altitude and timing advantage). One player even learned the angle the Phoenix descends and sometimes intercepts it with a Maddog SD-10 for funny. I get about the same number of kills with the Sidewinder and the Phoenix, Banzai people down for a pre-merge Phoenix shot seems to be the best tactic

[FR4GGL3]

There is this "Tomcat Sunset" Interview with Puck Howe. He describes quite a bit of how they would have used the Pheonix. I never heared more details about it. He also stated that it could easily be notched at long ranges. So I am afraid that the DCS Phoenix Behaviour is like it should behave (more or less because obvious you are limited in simulating any weapons - even if you would know how to simulate it correctly you are simply not allowed to do it right).

Edited April 25, 2024 by FR4GGL3

[westr]

Got a 60nm kill v a Veteran skill level F4 other day. 
Fired from roughly 40k feet and nearly Mach 1. 
Height I find makes a big difference with long range shots. 
 

AIM54C I find more accurate against the smaller targets than the A. 

[FR4GGL3]

The C is better than the A in almost any case (I'm not an expert there could be exceptions). And there are "lucky shots" like this. But that doesn't mean that the Phoenix can do this constantly against anything.

The Phoenix was great at its time and it paved the way for modern weapons. But it is big as a truck and it moves like a truck. It simply has its limits. You can't expect it to be the greatest weapon in DCS. We should love the Tomcat and the Phoenix for what it is: a true legend with a bombshell look

[Kageseigi]

On 4/25/2024 at 2:33 AM, FR4GGL3 said:

There is this "Tomcat Sunset" Interview with Puck Howe. He describes quite a bit of how they would have used the Pheonix. I never heared more details about it. He also stated that it could easily be notched at long ranges. So I am afraid that the DCS Phoenix Behaviour is like it should behave (more or less because obvious you are limited in simulating any weapons - even if you would know how to simulate it correctly you are simply not allowed to do it right).

 

If this was the part you were referring to, it does confuse me a bit. Specifically, he mentions these three ranges...

30-40: Shoot to catch target off-guard
20-30: Don't shoot because they will maneuver 
20-: Shoot

He also said all a target had to do from 50 miles was turn 25 degrees, and that would defeat the missile. I don't understand that, though. Is it because 25 degrees would be enough to bleed off the missile's energy or because it would put the target into a position for a notch?

Either way, he started off talking about the AWG-9 specifically being susceptible to notching, and the APG-71 would give the Phoenix a much better shot because the missile would know were to find the notching target once the supporting radar lost track. Then again, doesn't the Phoenix (at least the C model) go active whenever the supporting radar loses track?

I don't know, I still wish I could find the math of the angles and notching requirements for cranking Tomcats and maneuvering targets. That is if a Tomcat launches at 30nm, and cranks left at 45 degrees, then the hot target turns 90 degrees (to its left) to notch the Tomcat's radar, what angle is the target going to be from the Phoenix' radar that goes active after losing support from the Tomcat itself, and how much more does it need to maneuver to reach 90 degrees from the Phoenix (or to leave the missile's search zone)? It seem like there should be a lot more to notching a supported Fox-3 than simply turning 90 degrees from the RWR threat. Especially from a missile that lofts extremely high.

[FR4GGL3]

As I said: I am not an expert, nor a Pilot or RIO. I just can take the things as they are. I can't even tell if these stories are realistic in any way.

The only thing I could Imagine is that they would shoot the Phoenix at 20 NM with ACM Cover up. The case when he stated they would make shure no friendly is in line of sight because the Phoenix would bite off something - no matter what. It also could make sense because of the 30 Seconds long burning Motor... As I said: I can't judge the stories, but it didn't sound unrealistic if I correlate it with other stories.

I can't say how good or bad the AWG9 really was. It sure was dated as the D-Tomcats got the APG71 so I really think this was a huge improvement.

 

But all of that doesn't matter much to us. Even if we knew how the things should work in real life. We won't get it. Think about it. If there is a buyable Software that simulates all the behaviour of weapons and weapon systems like radars correctly, bad boys could use it to train how to evade missiles, where the weak spots of Fighter Systems are and so on. We don't want that for sure.

 

If you want something "realistic" learn to use what you have. Try and adept. And then again the idea of this game is not to be a competitive game. So buffs and nerfs don't make any sense. There are better and not so good simulated behaviours. But the good thing is: no lifes are in danger, nothing depends on how realistic it is. You can play it pretty hard with modules like the Tomcat or you can get away with things like too hard landings and even overstressing the simulated airframe. It only matters for you (which is a good thing).

[The_Tau]

9 hours ago, Kageseigi said:

If this was the part you were referring to, it does confuse me a bit. Specifically, he mentions these three ranges...

30-40: Shoot to catch target off-guard
20-30: Don't shoot because they will maneuver 
20-: Shoot

 

 

I use that in DCS, and it works quite well. I would even decrease  range of "ACM" shots to more like 10-15nm and use STT

9 hours ago, Kageseigi said:

Either way, he started off talking about the AWG-9 specifically being susceptible to notching, and the APG-71 would give the Phoenix a much better shot because the missile would know were to find the notching target once the supporting radar lost track. Then again, doesn't the Phoenix (at least the C model) go active whenever the supporting radar loses track?

 

Yes 54C goes active but it goes to extrapolated track, so where system thinks the bandit is and not where bandit actually is with APG71. So obviously newer radar is better. 

[The_Doktor]

Hi

i am always a bit disappointed when i read the stuff about old radar old missile or that all was just a lie to fool congress to

make money. All the physics mathematics and aerodynamics that went in this stuff will never get old.

Sometimes i get the feeling that moon landing denier and phoenix doubter have a bit in common. Its from the 60s? So old tech it cant be true.

This is a insult to all the people of the time that put all there wisdom and skills in it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsR19m2udXE

And today a bunch of computer game players talk BS about the missile and radar because they believe a badly made simulation more.

Maybe for more balance in there PvP "over G flap out" Growling Sidewinder server shooting R27ETER from the bottom of a caucasus

canyon that goes twice as fast as any other SARH missile in game. how knows?

About the Puck Howe guy. I would like to go fishing with him to see what he pulls out of the water. AIM-9X maybe? I am sure it will be at least

a wall of fish!

Taking off the carrier with a broken radar so that you need a good RIO to make it work is not a good example of the capability of the AWG-9.

Ward Carroll timeline 40nm? OK fine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38FGpJ_6Js4 but then the AI comes into play...well

 

What do I know? Nothing.

 

[draconus]

On 4/27/2024 at 8:05 AM, Kageseigi said:

I don't know, I still wish I could find the math of the angles and notching requirements for cranking Tomcats and maneuvering targets. That is if a Tomcat launches at 30nm, and cranks left at 45 degrees, then the hot target turns 90 degrees (to its left) to notch the Tomcat's radar, what angle is the target going to be from the Phoenix' radar that goes active after losing support from the Tomcat itself, and how much more does it need to maneuver to reach 90 degrees from the Phoenix (or to leave the missile's search zone)? It seem like there should be a lot more to notching a supported Fox-3 than simply turning 90 degrees from the RWR threat. Especially from a missile that lofts extremely high.

The "math" is simple here. To notch a TWS shot before the missile is active you're beaming the shooter aircraft and fly lower than him. When the missile goes active you beam the missile. The cranking angle depends on how much closure you want. If you want max closure you don't crank at all - you fly to intercept point. If want min closure crank to gimbal opposite of bandit's nose.