Situational awareness, SARH, SAMS and the BVR (single player)

[X-man]

No I do not have a point.... But I cant really agree on something becoming a fact because two people did a few hours research.

Edited May 1, 2009 by X-man

[topol-m]

Some sort of caveat we were not aware of?

 

:)

 

Is this downgrading of missiles in the game intentional or not? I see no reason in it. Why is more realism not a good thing?

[RvEYoda]

No I do not have a point.... But I cant really agree on something becoming a fact because two people did a few hours research.

 

Well Xman, if military documents from both the US and Russian side show the same

thing, and that don't convince you, then I don't know what to do...

[X-man]

One could argue that that is as close as we can get to whats "real" with our clearance, but it's hardly the whole truth regarding RL Aim9 vs Lockon Aim120 ;) Be more humble

[RvEYoda]

With that kind of attitude you might as well give all missiles the same speed, name and tracking.

You may want to read some of the research done by other development crews,

especially whats been made by the different falcon4 research groups.

 

Just because you dont look closer, doesn't mean others cant..

We already had this discussion in eagle forums with the material posted in the forums.

Xman would you like me to post it (again? =))

Edited May 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[RedTiger]

That and perfect SA from the AI means that turning away from the enemy or getting WVR can be dangerous. I've been splashed a few times by simply losing sight of F16's / F5's and not decisively seperating, instead trying to spot them (never works, they always shoot me down). It's a habit I struggle to shake.

 

I do like playing this way though, with no labels / no padlock. It mirrors what I've read about losing tally very easily. The LOD transition remains a nuisance.

 

You don't turn away from the bandit WVR. This is all BVR. The idea is to avoid the first missile and get well below the bandit. In fact, don't get below them. START below them. Just pretend your look-down, shoot-down ability is non-existent. You're sacrificing the initial shot for the benefit of it being impossible to be notched yourself. Don't misunderstand me when I say "benefit". ;) I initially started doing this when I started to fly the MiG-29A a lot for realism purposes. I didn't want to rely on the look-down capability. The fact that I sacrificed first shot for look-up was just a side-effect. :) In reality, the high, fast flyer with good look down ability has a big advantage. Unfortunately no one told the AI and the Aim-120 flight model this!

 

When you turn back towards the bandit, if you succesfully locate them, start trying to tally them visually at THAT point. Unless you're fighting a Tomcat armed with Aim-54s where notching multiple times is possible, you're only going to get one chance at this notch business. If you can't lock them up and put the heat on in a hurry, run away. Trying to notch a second time is dangerous for all the reasons you and cool t mentioned. Any futher evasion is going to have to be done almost head-on, especially since you want to maintain SA while doding missiles if you inevitably have to merge and duke it out.

 

This is ALL "vs. AI" stuff, btw.

Edited May 1, 2009 by RedTiger

[Kula66]

the amraam in lockon never flies 30 nm. (unless you exploit the physics code, lockon missiles

going UP flying longer than missiles flying DOWN ^^)

 

I hate to think this is true (never tested it myself) - the opposite of RL.

 

Interesting stuff Yoda ..

 

I really hope they get it right next time!

[RvEYoda]

yes, its quite frustrating.

It's due to the drag v altitude modelling + missile accelleration after

launch modelling.

 

Unfortunately the result is the guy firing from high will be in danger before

the guy firing at him from below.

 

I can give a full mathematical explanation later if you want.

[Kula66]

I used to fly alot online but it just got so frustrating trying to fly the textbook Eagle profile, on high looking down! From what I understand you should have at least double the missile range in RL!

 

The mechanics of notching, does it really only work low to high? I uderstand the way it works, but does radar use doppler on lower targets and not on higher ones (given that this can all happen in a single series of successive scans) or doppler all the time. If the latter is the case, then you should be able to notch a radar even if the radar is lower than the target. This doesn't seem to be the case.

[RvEYoda]

The doppler shift is only necessary to use if you have other disturbances nearby,

because it will determine the closure of the object causing the radar reflection.

 

Because there is no background clutter to separate from when looking up,

a doppler notch is usually not necessary.

 

yes you should probably have even more than double range if you got

good lofted shots. There is a good software out there for missile tests

called *Minizap*. It's written to include a ton of different parameters, and although

it probably cant be used to provide a good missile vs missile comparison, it is

extremely useful for comparing low vs high shots.

[Frostie]

Lock-On doesn't model drag quite as it ought, especially a higher altitudes. That still doesn't change the fact that LO's AIM-120 and AIM-9's energy profiles are PORKED. They're not the only ones, just

The RL R-77 must be a beast, hope this gets sorted out in DCS too, not to mention the 130km range of the R-27ER.;)

[GGTharos]

The RL R-77 might well have a higher peak-speed than AMRAAM, being a larger missile. I'll have to check parameters, but I think it might have had a wider Rtr initially rather than longer range ... but the devil here is in the details.

 

The R-27ER will never have 130km range, unless you drop it from orbit (further, the Su-27 can't guide it anywhere near that far - at least not the Su-27P/S). However it could definitely use a longer burning motor like it ought (some 13-15 sec) as well as the AIM-7.

 

The difference isn't going to be so much in range as the amount of time it takes to reach it ... the R-27(E)'s would arrive first.

However they don't seem to singificantly out-range a 120, if at all (Hint: R-27R range is 41km at 10km with a 1000kt closure. The AIM-120A gets 35km Rmax at 4000m, under the same conditions - actually, shooting slightly look-down). I also deliberately took the highest known (with reasonable reliability) figure for the R-27R. The R-27R1 diagram indicates a 35km range under the same circumstances as the R1.

If you think the ER extends this to 130, I have a few bridges to sell you basically. ;)

Edited May 1, 2009 by GGTharos

[RvEYoda]

R-77s and Amraams are sooooooo porked in terms of range :).

So is the sparrow and Aim9.

 

And like Frostie mentions also R-27ER is performing odd,

but if you log and plot lockon's speed profile of it, at least it has reasonable

max speed and drag, but its burn time should probably be increased.

 

EDIT: In the very high v very high amraam would be almost capable of the ERs range,

however in low vs low (where burn time matters), the ER should far outrange the slammer,

especially in the chase arena.

[Kula66]

The doppler shift is only necessary to use if you have other disturbances nearby,

because it will determine the closure of the object causing the radar reflection.

 

Ok, I didn't explain this well - if a plane is flying at 10k' and scans a volume of sky from say 5k' to 15k' - would it use doppler across the whole volume or be smart enough only to use doppler on the parts of the scan below it.

 

If it used doppler on the whole scan, as I suspect, because it is in doppler mode, you could just as easily beam the rader from a point at 14k', ie. above the radar as below it, at 6k'. This doesn't seem to be how it works in LO where above = no doppler and beaming doesn't work and below = doppler and beaming does work.

 

Re: missiles, the very low drag of AMRAAM vR-77 needs to be considered - those potato mashers must be very draggy, especially when turning.

[GGTharos]

Ok, I didn't explain this well - if a plane is flying at 10k' and scans a volume of sky from say 5k' to 15k' - would it use doppler across the whole volume or be smart enough only to use doppler on the parts of the scan below it.

 

This depends on the radar itself, and every radar type/model is different. And so the real answer is, we don't know, but we think that it would only use a doppler filter that would allow you to notch when necessary - ie. even if looking high, you can clutter it up by pumping out a bunch of chaff.

When looking high otherwise, you can shift your doppler filter to filre things out that you'd never see anyway ;)

 

Re: missiles, the very low drag of AMRAAM vR-77 needs to be considered - those potato mashers must be very draggy, especially when turning.

The R-77's control surfaces should be less draggy at high mach, more draggy at low mach or subsonic (air-brake like almost). However the overall drag for both of them at high mach is likely comparable, which probably leaves us with the lighter missile - the AMRAAM, slowing down faster due to drag.

[RvEYoda]

Sry for misunderstanding your q Kula, i was in a hurry :)

[Frostie]

Re: missiles, the very low drag of AMRAAM vR-77 needs to be considered - those potato mashers must be very draggy, especially when turning.

The AMRAAM's delta's are an older generation of design compared to the R-77's slats and mashers.

[GGTharos]

... Which says precisely nothing. Note that currently it is the only AAM with that control surface design, and whether it will be used again is still debatable. There's no other AAM design, current or projected that is taking them into consideration for the moment.

[Frostie]

Fair enough to criticise Russian a/c, but in missile design Russia leads the way, just look at the R-27 family with the reversed canards. This technology was cutting edge and efficient back then, even then delta's were regarded as a standard choice.

Have a look at MICA, Meteor and IRIS-T they have body strakes much like the R-77, Russian missile tech is not ignored nor should it be mocked.

[GGTharos]

What does this have to do with missile range and established existing missile performance data?

 

Fair enough to criticise Russian a/c, but in missile design Russia leads the way, just look at the R-27 family with the reversed canards. This technology was cutting edge and efficient back then, even then delta's were regarded as a standard choice.

Have a look at MICA, Meteor and IRIS-T they have body strakes much like the R-77, Russian missile tech is not ignored nor should it be mocked.

[RvEYoda]

This thread has derailed badly, Tecnological advance of R-77:

 

(boy am i gonna ge shit for this ... )

[Kula66]

The AMRAAM's delta's are an older generation of design compared to the R-77's slats and mashers.

 

No, they are designed to produce less drag and as such probably less turning ability. Less drag = more range and more energy at a given range allowing greater ability to manouvre. To counter this the R-77 has a larger diameter motor, which will push up the weight etc etc.

 

Western designs tend to be conservative and no one is saying Russian designs are not ground breaking or innovative (there are dozens of examples in other military fields - SSNs, tanks, TV, SAMs, ASMs etc).

 

However, Western designs have proven to work very well in recent combat - although they have not been matched against the latest Russian designs. But, many of those advanced Russian designs are only in serivice in small numbers or no longer operatign at all!

[Kula66]

And so the real answer is, we don't know, but we think that it would only use a doppler filter that would allow you to notch when necessary

 

Ok, best guess of smart people ... I can live with that ;)

[X-man]

 

Yoda and GG are not only saying that the missiles are porked, but that the game it self is porked when it comes to drag and gravity and a lot of other factors as well. A whole rewrite of that code is needed to solve this problem as not only these missiles are affected (but maybe more then certain others).

 

And for the record, I never questioned that the Aim9 or Aim120 was porked, only how much.

Edited May 2, 2009 by X-man

[Kuky]

I had some fun in quick missions where I had russian awacs flying at 7500m and 600km/h... I was able to lock it in F-14 (of course enabling AI as flyable) at good 300km I think and could get lock at 250km... I got to 13000m altitude and I had range at 180km... the AIM-54 I fired got hit every time. Then also with Su-27 and R-27ER I could fire from 10000m altitude and 80km range (and this was slightly above indicated R-max)... the missile would hit every time. The thing with AIM-54, that thing was gliding at 25-26km altitude with very limited sleed loss, and it would hit the awacs from 180km still having well over 1000km/h.

 

Oh when is DCS figher(s) gona come out :(