Missile realism getting updated?

[truebrit]

After questioning on Hoggit why the AIM-9 hits the back of the Tu-95 and not the engines, I learned that the heat seeking missiles in DCS target the pilot not the actual heat source. Is this true, and if so when are the mechanics/physics getting updated?

[Exorcet]

From what I know, targeting is centered on the pilot for weapons in general, not just missiles. Weapons/sensors just see a point on the target to go after. IR missiles also see the heat level of the target which is set as a coefficient for mil power and AB power.

I'm not aware of any plans to change this specifically, though ED has mentioned a desire to improve AI targeting, which might cover missile seekers.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

I always see this stated without anything to substantiate it. For what it's worth, I haven't noticed myself getting pilot killed all that often.

EDIT: Parked an A-10 next to a ZU-23. It fired centermass. I didn't even bother to close the A-10's canopy. Just dropped her down and it went right for center mass.

Edited June 24 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Dragon1-1]

Weapons in DCS seem to go for the COM. This is realistic for guns, radar missiles, modern heatseekers (starting from AIM-9M and equivalent) and anything command guided. Only older heatseekers, the ones that just see a point heat source, should be going for the engine pipe.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Another set of demos, one with an F-14.  The gun still goes right for the middle.

And, a Ka-50 in flight for an Igla. Once again, it seems to go for center of mass.

Color me surprised to discover that Reddit is wrong!

Edited June 24 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Exorcet]

It looks like some of the confusion arises from the speculation that missile fuses base distance on the pilot and not aircraft, but a quick search left this unconfirmed.

Anyway I agree with @Dragon1-1's point that the seeker tracking the aircraft as a point probably isn't a big deal, although it would be nice to have. I think more important would be refining the heat coefficients to make them more than just two values, and then possibly have them vary with aspect like RCS now does.

[Default774]

16 hours ago, Exorcet said:

It looks like some of the confusion arises from the speculation that missile fuses base distance on the pilot and not aircraft, but a quick search left this unconfirmed.

 

This is also a myth and quickly disproven with a small amount of testing. Try putting down a B-52/Tu-95 or similarly large aircraft and shooting a missile at it from the direct 3/9 o clock. You can clearly tell that the missile guides to the centre of mass and fuzes off of the 3d model/collision box, not the pilot.

 

[Dragon1-1]

I suspect the myth comes from seeing a missile in lead pursuit, which sure looks like it's aiming for the pilot, despite it actually tracking the aircraft's COM and just pointing its nose slightly in front of it. This is the correct behavior for all but the very earliest heatseekers.

[Mad_Shell]

18 hours ago, Exorcet said:

I think more important would be refining the heat coefficients to make them more than just two values, and then possibly have them vary with aspect like RCS now does.

Whilr it's true that the aircraft IR emissions are just a few values (engine off, engine on, afterburner), the aspect IS taken into account in DCS. A heat seeking missile will have a lock on an rear aspect aircraft way sooner than on a front aspect one.

Edited June 25 by Mad_Shell

[Exorcet]

5 hours ago, Default774 said:

This is also a myth and quickly disproven with a small amount of testing. Try putting down a B-52/Tu-95 or similarly large aircraft and shooting a missile at it from the direct 3/9 o clock. You can clearly tell that the missile guides to the centre of mass and fuzes off of the 3d model/collision box, not the pilot.

 

I can try to look later, but I think the fuse issue will only show when the missile can't physically hit the target, otherwise yes it will explode on contact.

2 hours ago, Mad_Shell said:

Whilr it's true that the aircraft IR emissions are just a few values (engine off, engine on, afterburner), the aspect IS taken into account in DCS. A heat seeking missile will have a lock on an rear aspect aircraft way sooner than on a front aspect one.

 

Does this impact flare resistance? I thought this was for the initial lock on only and once locked all that matters is AB on vs off.

[Mad_Shell]

49 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Does this impact flare resistance? I thought this was for the initial lock on only and once locked all that matters is AB on vs off.

If I remember my testings right it also effects the flare resistance. I would need to redo some testing to be completely sure though.

[Hobel]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Exorcet:

I can try to look later, but I think the fuse issue will only show when the missile can't physically hit the target, otherwise yes it will explode on contact.

Does this impact flare resistance? I thought this was for the initial lock on only and once locked all that matters is AB on vs off.

In dcs the missle always explodes with a certain distance as high as the pf  is. With aim120 that would be 9m.  A time delay is also mentioned in the lua.  

  With the future new proxy fuze mechanics, however, this could all get a fine tuning.

Edited June 25 by Hobel

[Default774]

On 6/25/2024 at 4:32 PM, Exorcet said:

I can try to look later, but I think the fuse issue will only show when the missile can't physically hit the target, otherwise yes it will explode on contact.

On 6/25/2024 at 2:05 PM, Mad_Shell said:

Not true, missile proximity fuzes work off of model collision box/3d model, absolutely nothing to do with model origin or pilot

pf1.trk

[Exorcet]

On 6/25/2024 at 11:55 AM, Hobel said:

In dcs the missle always explodes with a certain distance as high as the pf  is. With aim120 that would be 9m.  A time delay is also mentioned in the lua.  

  With the future new proxy fuze mechanics, however, this could all get a fine tuning.

 

 

33 minutes ago, Default774 said:

Not true, missile proximity fuzes work off of model collision box/3d model, absolutely nothing to do with model origin or pilot

pf1.trk 91.52 kB · 2 downloads

The distance does look to be offset from the nearest surface from testing. For good measure I fired on a MiG-31 from the front and behind and an AIM-120 exploded consistently from both directions. I hadn't realized before that the proximity fuse also always detonates, I thought direct contact was possible but it appears not.

[Pavlin_33]

On 6/25/2024 at 11:45 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

I suspect the myth comes from seeing a missile in lead pursuit, which sure looks like it's aiming for the pilot, despite it actually tracking the aircraft's COM and just pointing its nose slightly in front of it. This is the correct behavior for all but the very earliest heatseekers.

Where did you get this information? Aim-9x goes for the pipe as it can be clearly seen on those testing videos. Same for that ground launch of 27-T against the Saudi F-15.

This is one of the reasons why the Russian jets have their engines spaced far a part - to minimize the damage a heat seeker can do.

[Hobel]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Exorcet:

I thought direct contact was possible but it appears not.

There are exceptions. 

 

If the missle has to fly strong maneuvers, it explodes on contact in the "game context".  However, I don't think this makes any difference to the final result and in case of doubt the fuze triggers. 

 

It then looks like this. 

Old examples:

https://youtu.be/C42h1dhJwKg?si=FV_hvgS2CGGgD1PB

Edited June 27 by Hobel

[Dragon1-1]

6 minutes ago, Pavlin_33 said:

Where did you get this information? Aim-9x goes for the pipe as it can be clearly seen on those testing videos.

Show me one video that shows it doing this "clearly", as opposed to simply approaching from behind. No, modern heatseekers take the shape of the whole aircraft into account, not only to reject flares, but also to avoid being fooled by having engines far apart (which is not why Russians do it, BTW, and it would not work even against missiles that do home on the jetpipe, because of the blast radius). Look up any unclassified docs on how their seekers work, and you'll understand why it's the only way they can work.

Edited June 27 by Dragon1-1

[Pavlin_33]

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Show me one video that shows it doing this "clearly", as opposed to simply approaching from behind. No, modern heatseekers take the shape of the whole aircraft into account, not only to reject flares, but also to avoid being fooled by having engines far apart (which is not why Russians do it, BTW, and it would not work even against missiles that do home on the jetpipe, because of the blast radius). Look up any unclassified docs on how their seekers work, and you'll understand why it's the only way they can work.

 

Here you go:

Unfortunately YT removed the 27T hit.

Edited June 27 by Pavlin_33
Adjusted time-stamp