R27R/ER lose track if you enter memory Mode

[GRY Money]

The R27R and ER lose track when you enter memory mode from reaching the gimbal limit of the radar and the missile is trashed.

Before last patch, the missile would start tracking again if you reacquired the target with the radar before memory mode times out and lock is lost. 

If you perform the same test with the F15C Aim7MH the missile will still track like the R27s used to before the patch. 

The Mig29 behaves the same as the flanker so i will report this in both weapon and Fc3 bug sections because i am unsure whether it's an issue with the missiles or the radars. 

In addition, the F-18 can guide a sparrow to impact while in gimbal memory mode so there is inconsistency. 

LastMissionTrack (5).trk LastMissionTrack (6).trk LastMissionTrack (7).trk

f18_memory_mode_exploit.trk

Edited September 27, 2024 by GRY Money

[ShadowFrost]

Known internally. 

Supposedly the radar should not enter memory mode on gimbal limits the track should just break, but the missile should recover in memory mode otherwise. 

I have an automatic test that tests this precise mode every patch

Edited September 27, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[GRY Money]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb ShadowFrost:

Known internally. 

Supposedly the radar should not enter memory mode on gimbal limits the track should just break, but the missile should recover in memory mode otherwise. 

I have an automatic test that tests this precise mode every patch

 

What about  gimbal memory mode for Eagle and Hornet, they are also supposed to not enter it? 

[ShadowFrost]

No idea

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Hopefully the R-27 will be properly modelled by the time we get the full-fidelity MiG-29  

[ShadowFrost]

7 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Hopefully the R-27 will be properly modelled by the time we get the full-fidelity MiG-29  

Whats that? 

Besides general seeker items/overhaul, its mostly FCR stuff we need.

Selectable range for seeker activation (datalink prior) 
and a flood fallback mode for the 29 FCR is about all that is missing IIRC 

 

Edited September 27, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

2 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

general seeker items/overhaul

Autopilot/guidance too, isn't it? Combined with a properly modelled radar that should hopefully fix a lot of frustrations people have with it.

[ShadowFrost]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Autopilot/guidance too, isn't it? Combined with a properly modelled radar that should hopefully fix a lot of frustrations people have with it.

If anything, we are going to lose options there; the missile only performs a main beam avoidance maneuver after launch and then guides to an intercept point via a very basic radio datalink to a point at which the seeker activates. Currently, we can manually loft it, but that isn't quite correct. 

Edited September 27, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[AeriaGloria]

22 hours ago, ShadowFrost said:

If anything, we are going to lose options there; the missile only performs a main beam avoidance maneuver after launch and then guides to an intercept point via a very basic radio datalink to a point at which the seeker activates. Currently, we can manually loft it, but that isn't quite correct. 

 

Why wouldn’t it be correct? The G load bias should limit maneuvering based on remaining TOF right? But then again I’ve tried to translate everything about the R-27 but haven’t heard of this main beam avoidance maneuver, but of course things are lost in translation 
 

I see it more as bringing it to same standard as AIM-7/120 by bringing it to new API, modeling the control surfaces, AOA, inertia/dynamic stability. Changing CG, modeling motor plume drag reduction. 

AIM-7/120 have all these things, and many air to ground missiles since 

 

[ShadowFrost]

10 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

Why wouldn’t it be correct? The G load bias should limit maneuvering based on remaining TOF right? But then again I’ve tried to translate everything about the R-27 but haven’t heard of this main beam avoidance maneuver, but of course things are lost in translation 
 

I see it more as bringing it to same standard as AIM-7/120 by bringing it to new API, modeling the control surfaces, AOA, inertia/dynamic stability. Changing CG, modeling motor plume drag reduction. 

AIM-7/120 have all these things, and many air to ground missiles since 

 

I would expect the optimal path the current missile takes (due to simplicities in guidance currently) is going to be reduced somewhat significantly. It is a fairly simple datalink with low HZ and also has limitations in the manual as to what maneuvers can be performed while ensuring guidance. 

 

Secondly, with an aggressive loft, you have the possibility of losing radio datalink connection with the rear antennas. Though INS does have the possibility of bringing it back, referencing the manual, I would not expect it to make aggressive changes as even with radio datalink, as there are references to be cautious of target and ownship aircraft maneuvering that can exceed datalink's control authority. 

With the datalink being radar encoded and that the sidelobes are not strong enough to send the signal. The sidelobes could theoretically be strong enough. But generally speaking, referencing SMEs, launching in configurations not inherently designed for is an easy way to break missiles. 

Now, I should add that a small loft in the range of 10-20 degrees would probably not break the missile. But if we get into the ranges of say 45-70 degrees.... The odds are not favorable unless explicitly allowed by the manual. 

Lastly, if the INS were fully capable and understood the kinematic benefits, why would it not loft itself when needed? (Without the need for manual lofting) No R-27 that was in service at the time (or currently) has shown such evidence. It was a rumored improvement of the 27EM; however, that missile never made it into production or past the prototype stage. 
 

 

And as a note, only the Aim-7MH/P should loft. (aim-120 is also modern enough) The R-27R does not as far as the evidence supports. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Irisz]

General information about RTS missile control
Purpose, composition and principles of construction

A radio control system (SRU) is a complex of functionally connected radio technical and other technical means, designed for automatic or semi-automatic control of an object (aircraft, missile) with the aim of bringing it to a given point or to a given position relative to another object in action destabilizing factors.

The information subsystem issues signals of missile deviation from the desired trajectory. The sources of information are radars, IR direction finders, other means of obtaining information about the target, radio technical information transmission systems, sensors of the parameters of the missile flight, the state of the missile and its subsystems, etc.. By processing the information with the appropriate algorithms of the computer (analog or digital), the deviation signal (SV ) rockets from the desired trajectory.
The control subsystem (missile control system - SUR) directly affects the missile control bodies (on the control object) in accordance with the SV to eliminate guidance errors.

During automatic missile control, the information subsystem equipment is located on the missile.
In case of non-automatic control with the participation of the operator, the equipment of the information subsystem is placed on the rocket and on the rocket carrier. The trajectory control signal generator (FSTU) provides the operator with information about the deviation of the missile from the desired trajectory by analyzing information about the relative position of the missile and the target. Based on this information, the operator adjusts the missile's flight using the control command generator (CCM). Control commands are transmitted to the missile through the command radio control line (CRC).

Destabilizing factors lead to deviation of the rocket from the desired trajectory and flight profile.
The missile control system (MSC) detects these deviations and produces control parameters ΔГ and ΔВ in the horizontal and vertical planes, which ensure the elimination of these deviations.
The deviation of the missile from the desired trajectory or flight profile is monitored by the information system of the missile or its carrier and is used to issue control commands that keep the missile on a given trajectory. During normal operation of the SUR
Δ ≈ 0.
In autonomous SUR, the control parameter Δ is formed by comparing the programmed (set) parameters of the rocket’s own movement (position) with the actual ones, which are controlled with the help of on-board information systems - gyroscopic, inertial, astronavigation, Doppler, radar, radionavigation, television, radio astronomy, barometric, control according to guidelines and others.
Autonomous SUDs are used to control missiles in order to impress stationary targets with known coordinates, as well as during the first stage of the missile's flight immediately after its launch to impress moving targets in non-autonomous and combined SUDs. In the latter case, thanks to the use of an autonomous air defense system at the first stage of its flight, the possible range of missile launches is significantly increased.

In non-autonomous SUR, the information received from the target (homing system) or from the control point (command radio control system, radio zone control system) is used to form the control parameter Δ.

In homing systems, missile control commands are formed based on the analysis of signals coming from the target - optical, infrared, radar, and the target's own radiation. Radar homing systems can be active, semi-active or passive.

In command control systems, the corresponding commands are formed on the carrier and transmitted to the missile via the command radio line. The measuring equipment of the information subsystem is placed completely on the carrier or partially on the rocket (for example, a television camera) and on the carrier.

In radio zone control systems, the carrier equipment creates a radio zone that sets the trajectory of the missile. The on-board equipment of the missile determines the current deviation of the missile from the axis of the radio zone for the formation of control commands.
Non-autonomous anti-missile systems are used to control missiles when hitting moving and stationary targets.

In combined SUR, both methods of obtaining and using information are used to form the control parameter Δ. Combined missile control systems by using the most rational control system at each stage of the missile's flight ensure the maximum quality of missile control and a long launch range. For example, targeting a long-range missile is carried out first according to the program, then by semi-active homing and finally by active homing.

In the pulse radiation radar, the illumination signal of the on-board fighter radar of the fP+FD frequency reflected by the target is followed in direction by the missile coordinator - the control parameter φ is determined or the additional selection of the target by range is carried out by comparing the moments of reception of the direct (tail antenna) and reflected (nose antenna) illumination signals.

In the radar of quasi-continuous radiation, reflected signals are selected by speed by comparing the frequencies of direct (tail antenna) and reflected (nose antenna) illumination signals. Modern missile coordinators are monopulse tracking direction finders. Thanks to this:
the coordinator is insensitive to amplitude-modulated interference created by the target; high accuracy of bearing is ensured.

Target selection by range or speed of approach during pulsed radiation is carried out by range or speed tracking systems.

On launch, the homing head (GOS) against the background of powerful signals from the aircraft's on-board radar transmitter cannot receive weak reflected signals. Therefore, only after launching the GOS to detect the attacked target, it searches for it. In order to avoid errors (when the target is not the same) and to speed up the start of homing, the target indication by angular coordinates and speed (range) is issued and memorized on the suspension in the GPS.

After launching the missile, the target can change its flight parameters. Therefore, a special radio correction channel is introduced to transmit changes in target parameters to the missile.

For coordinators, errors such as angular noise are characteristic, which are the result of the fact that when approaching the target, its angular dimensions increase and the target is no longer perceived as a point. This is taken into account by the missile control system algorithm.

Advantages of semi-active GOS:
long range of action with small size and weight;
independence from weather conditions and the target's own radiation;
the possibility of additional selection by speed (distance);
the possibility of correcting the parameters of the missile control channel after its launch.
Disadvantages of semi-active GOS:
the need to illuminate the target until the moment of its impression;
the possibility of creating interference on the reference signal channel (radio correction);
the complexity of the rocket equipment.

The passive GOS coordinator accompanies the target by its own (thermal) radiation or by the radiation of the radio-electronic equipment of the target.

Powerful thermal infrared (IR) radiation in the range of 1.8 ... 6 μm is created by the power plants of airplanes and helicopters mainly in their rear hemisphere (ZNS). The high spatial selection and sensitivity of thermal homing heads (TSH) allow to identify and track the target in its runway even before launch. After launch, such a passive missile homing system operates autonomously.

Passive radar homing heads (PRGS) are used in air-to-air missiles to impress emitting radio-electronic objects (RADS). As in the TGS, targeting, detection and capture of the target for tracking is carried out before the launch of the missile.

The launch is carried out when the permitted launch range is reached. The starting moment is determined by indirect methods - by ground reference points with known coordinates of the object, by the basic or angular method with unknown coordinates.

The flight of the rocket is carried out at a reference height. The moment of the start of diving on the target is determined upon reaching the calculated angle of elevation.

3. Command radio control systems

The principle of operation of command systems

Alignment of the control point (aircraft – missile carrier), target (biased point) and missile on the same straight line is provided by PU commands, which are generated based on the results of monitoring the current position of the missile relative to the given flight path.

The control parameter is the angular ε or linear h deviation of the missile from the given trajectory.

The angular deviation ε is controlled by the carrier's on-board equipment by tracking the directions to the target and the missile.
Linear deviation is calculated: h=ε·D. The current range D of the missile is monitored by the range finder of the carrier or calculated: D=∫V(t)·dt or D≈VSer·t, where VSer and t are the average speed of the missile and its flight time after launch.
The current value of the control parameter is transmitted to the missile via a radio telemetry line.

A possible option is when the control parameter is calculated by the rocket equipment. In this case, the current results of monitoring the position of the missile and the target are transmitted to the missile via the telemetry line.

The carrier receives information about the coordinates of the target εЦ, ДЦ and the missile εР, DR with the help of radar coordinates of the target (VKC) and the missile (VKR). VKTS is an active-type radar, and VKR is an active-response radar. The current coordinates of the target and the missile are used by the control parameter calculator (ОбчΔ) to determine the missile control parameter.

The current value of the control parameter and other information in the control command generator (CCM) are converted into control commands.

The transmitting part of the multi-channel command radio control line (KRU) transmits these commands on the operating frequency. From the received radio signal, the receiving part of the missile control unit issues control commands for the missile control system (MSC). The encoder (Ш) and decoder (ДШ) of the switchgear are means of protection against interference.

The command radio control system of the fighter

In the weapon control systems of modern fighter jets, command radio control of missiles after their launch is used to correct missile control algorithms at the stage from missile launch to the start of target tracking with missile homing heads.

Control commands are formed and transmitted over the target illumination radio channel by semi-active radar homing missiles.
A base-3 code is sometimes used to transmit air-to-air missile control commands; its alphabet consists of the symbols "-1", "0" and "+1".
Codes with a base of 2 can be used to encode the signals of each of the three symbols, for example, the 5-bit code 1-1-1-0-1.

In the ternary system, a “direct” code is used, that is, the sequence of symbols 1-1-1-0-1, a “reverse” code, which is an inversion of the direct code, that is, a sequence of symbols 0-0-0-1-0, and the so-called “ "zero" code, in which there is no coding of primary signals. If frequency modulation of the signal with frequencies Fm1 and Fm2, which correspond to elementary binary symbols "0" and "1" of the code, is used for coding, then signals according to the table will correspond to each of the three symbols of the alphabet.

With two-digit words in the triple number system, it is possible, for example, to convey the set of six corrections given in the table with a value that is a multiple of  of some of the missile control parameters.

The remaining codes (-1; +1) and (+1; -1) can be used to transmit two more one-time commands.

This is very detailed!

 

[ShadowFrost]

20 minutes ago, Irisz said:

General information about RTS missile control
Purpose, composition and principles of construction

A radio control system (SRU) is a complex of functionally connected radio technical and other technical means, designed for automatic or semi-automatic control of an object (aircraft, missile) with the aim of bringing it to a given point or to a given position relative to another object in action destabilizing factors.

The information subsystem issues signals of missile deviation from the desired trajectory. The sources of information are radars, IR direction finders, other means of obtaining information about the target, radio technical information transmission systems, sensors of the parameters of the missile flight, the state of the missile and its subsystems, etc.. By processing the information with the appropriate algorithms of the computer (analog or digital), the deviation signal (SV ) rockets from the desired trajectory.
The control subsystem (missile control system - SUR) directly affects the missile control bodies (on the control object) in accordance with the SV to eliminate guidance errors.

During automatic missile control, the information subsystem equipment is located on the missile.
In case of non-automatic control with the participation of the operator, the equipment of the information subsystem is placed on the rocket and on the rocket carrier. The trajectory control signal generator (FSTU) provides the operator with information about the deviation of the missile from the desired trajectory by analyzing information about the relative position of the missile and the target. Based on this information, the operator adjusts the missile's flight using the control command generator (CCM). Control commands are transmitted to the missile through the command radio control line (CRC).

Destabilizing factors lead to deviation of the rocket from the desired trajectory and flight profile.
The missile control system (MSC) detects these deviations and produces control parameters ΔГ and ΔВ in the horizontal and vertical planes, which ensure the elimination of these deviations.
The deviation of the missile from the desired trajectory or flight profile is monitored by the information system of the missile or its carrier and is used to issue control commands that keep the missile on a given trajectory. During normal operation of the SUR
Δ ≈ 0.
In autonomous SUR, the control parameter Δ is formed by comparing the programmed (set) parameters of the rocket’s own movement (position) with the actual ones, which are controlled with the help of on-board information systems - gyroscopic, inertial, astronavigation, Doppler, radar, radionavigation, television, radio astronomy, barometric, control according to guidelines and others.
Autonomous SUDs are used to control missiles in order to impress stationary targets with known coordinates, as well as during the first stage of the missile's flight immediately after its launch to impress moving targets in non-autonomous and combined SUDs. In the latter case, thanks to the use of an autonomous air defense system at the first stage of its flight, the possible range of missile launches is significantly increased.

In non-autonomous SUR, the information received from the target (homing system) or from the control point (command radio control system, radio zone control system) is used to form the control parameter Δ.

In homing systems, missile control commands are formed based on the analysis of signals coming from the target - optical, infrared, radar, and the target's own radiation. Radar homing systems can be active, semi-active or passive.

In command control systems, the corresponding commands are formed on the carrier and transmitted to the missile via the command radio line. The measuring equipment of the information subsystem is placed completely on the carrier or partially on the rocket (for example, a television camera) and on the carrier.

In radio zone control systems, the carrier equipment creates a radio zone that sets the trajectory of the missile. The on-board equipment of the missile determines the current deviation of the missile from the axis of the radio zone for the formation of control commands.
Non-autonomous anti-missile systems are used to control missiles when hitting moving and stationary targets.

In combined SUR, both methods of obtaining and using information are used to form the control parameter Δ. Combined missile control systems by using the most rational control system at each stage of the missile's flight ensure the maximum quality of missile control and a long launch range. For example, targeting a long-range missile is carried out first according to the program, then by semi-active homing and finally by active homing.

In the pulse radiation radar, the illumination signal of the on-board fighter radar of the fP+FD frequency reflected by the target is followed in direction by the missile coordinator - the control parameter φ is determined or the additional selection of the target by range is carried out by comparing the moments of reception of the direct (tail antenna) and reflected (nose antenna) illumination signals.

In the radar of quasi-continuous radiation, reflected signals are selected by speed by comparing the frequencies of direct (tail antenna) and reflected (nose antenna) illumination signals. Modern missile coordinators are monopulse tracking direction finders. Thanks to this:
the coordinator is insensitive to amplitude-modulated interference created by the target; high accuracy of bearing is ensured.

Target selection by range or speed of approach during pulsed radiation is carried out by range or speed tracking systems.

On launch, the homing head (GOS) against the background of powerful signals from the aircraft's on-board radar transmitter cannot receive weak reflected signals. Therefore, only after launching the GOS to detect the attacked target, it searches for it. In order to avoid errors (when the target is not the same) and to speed up the start of homing, the target indication by angular coordinates and speed (range) is issued and memorized on the suspension in the GPS.

After launching the missile, the target can change its flight parameters. Therefore, a special radio correction channel is introduced to transmit changes in target parameters to the missile.

For coordinators, errors such as angular noise are characteristic, which are the result of the fact that when approaching the target, its angular dimensions increase and the target is no longer perceived as a point. This is taken into account by the missile control system algorithm.

Advantages of semi-active GOS:
long range of action with small size and weight;
independence from weather conditions and the target's own radiation;
the possibility of additional selection by speed (distance);
the possibility of correcting the parameters of the missile control channel after its launch.
Disadvantages of semi-active GOS:
the need to illuminate the target until the moment of its impression;
the possibility of creating interference on the reference signal channel (radio correction);
the complexity of the rocket equipment.

The passive GOS coordinator accompanies the target by its own (thermal) radiation or by the radiation of the radio-electronic equipment of the target.

Powerful thermal infrared (IR) radiation in the range of 1.8 ... 6 μm is created by the power plants of airplanes and helicopters mainly in their rear hemisphere (ZNS). The high spatial selection and sensitivity of thermal homing heads (TSH) allow to identify and track the target in its runway even before launch. After launch, such a passive missile homing system operates autonomously.

Passive radar homing heads (PRGS) are used in air-to-air missiles to impress emitting radio-electronic objects (RADS). As in the TGS, targeting, detection and capture of the target for tracking is carried out before the launch of the missile.

The launch is carried out when the permitted launch range is reached. The starting moment is determined by indirect methods - by ground reference points with known coordinates of the object, by the basic or angular method with unknown coordinates.

The flight of the rocket is carried out at a reference height. The moment of the start of diving on the target is determined upon reaching the calculated angle of elevation.

3. Command radio control systems

The principle of operation of command systems

Alignment of the control point (aircraft – missile carrier), target (biased point) and missile on the same straight line is provided by PU commands, which are generated based on the results of monitoring the current position of the missile relative to the given flight path.

The control parameter is the angular ε or linear h deviation of the missile from the given trajectory.

The angular deviation ε is controlled by the carrier's on-board equipment by tracking the directions to the target and the missile.
Linear deviation is calculated: h=ε·D. The current range D of the missile is monitored by the range finder of the carrier or calculated: D=∫V(t)·dt or D≈VSer·t, where VSer and t are the average speed of the missile and its flight time after launch.
The current value of the control parameter is transmitted to the missile via a radio telemetry line.

A possible option is when the control parameter is calculated by the rocket equipment. In this case, the current results of monitoring the position of the missile and the target are transmitted to the missile via the telemetry line.

The carrier receives information about the coordinates of the target εЦ, ДЦ and the missile εР, DR with the help of radar coordinates of the target (VKC) and the missile (VKR). VKTS is an active-type radar, and VKR is an active-response radar. The current coordinates of the target and the missile are used by the control parameter calculator (ОбчΔ) to determine the missile control parameter.

The current value of the control parameter and other information in the control command generator (CCM) are converted into control commands.

The transmitting part of the multi-channel command radio control line (KRU) transmits these commands on the operating frequency. From the received radio signal, the receiving part of the missile control unit issues control commands for the missile control system (MSC). The encoder (Ш) and decoder (ДШ) of the switchgear are means of protection against interference.

The command radio control system of the fighter

In the weapon control systems of modern fighter jets, command radio control of missiles after their launch is used to correct missile control algorithms at the stage from missile launch to the start of target tracking with missile homing heads.

Control commands are formed and transmitted over the target illumination radio channel by semi-active radar homing missiles.
A base-3 code is sometimes used to transmit air-to-air missile control commands; its alphabet consists of the symbols "-1", "0" and "+1".
Codes with a base of 2 can be used to encode the signals of each of the three symbols, for example, the 5-bit code 1-1-1-0-1.

In the ternary system, a “direct” code is used, that is, the sequence of symbols 1-1-1-0-1, a “reverse” code, which is an inversion of the direct code, that is, a sequence of symbols 0-0-0-1-0, and the so-called “ "zero" code, in which there is no coding of primary signals. If frequency modulation of the signal with frequencies Fm1 and Fm2, which correspond to elementary binary symbols "0" and "1" of the code, is used for coding, then signals according to the table will correspond to each of the three symbols of the alphabet.

With two-digit words in the triple number system, it is possible, for example, to convey the set of six corrections given in the table with a value that is a multiple of  of some of the missile control parameters.

The remaining codes (-1; +1) and (+1; -1) can be used to transmit two more one-time commands.

This is very detailed!

 

Might as well link the secret projects while you're at it lol

[Irisz]

4 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

Might as well link the secret projects while you're at it lol

An accurate description is better than inventing false theories with the help of guesswork and fantasy!

[ShadowFrost]

9 minutes ago, Irisz said:

An accurate description is better than inventing false theories with the help of guesswork and fantasy!

What you've quoted doesn't explain any limitations, just how the guidance deviations are corrected. And I'm not seeing anything here that disagrees with what I've said. Its just explaining how the commands were encoded through the radar. 

I put more faith in what SMEs say who have better knowledge on the topic. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Irisz]

19 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

What you've quoted doesn't explain any limitations, just how the guidance deviations are corrected. And I'm not seeing anything here that disagrees with what I've said. Its just explaining how the commands were encoded through the radar. 

I put more faith in what SMEs say who have better knowledge on the topic. 

 

This is the real operating principle, I think the developers know this better because they have all the documents, even secret ones that we cannot see. The MiG-29 pilot on the forum doesn't really like to talk about weapons either because it's secret! So guessing and fabricating theories is the worst.

Anyway, if a missile is lost, a new missile has to be launched, and usually these missile launches can be visually detected and tracked to see what happens. If they do not go to the destination or if the driving to the destination is interrupted, you will see it visually or the game will let you know. I play quite a lot on the GS server where these missiles are the main game tools and the players have enough reasons that the R-27ER is not among the popular missiles. Some treat this memory mode as if they were going into battle with only one missile. Boredom often leads people to convulsively get involved in something that is not so important. If there are enough missiles, you have to use them!This is a Flaming Cliffs product anyway, not the MiG-29 with a fully clickable cockpit, where I think the developers will deal with this, because every detail is important to get a real MiG-29!

Edited September 29, 2024 by Irisz

[AeriaGloria]

 

9 hours ago, ShadowFrost said:

I would expect the optimal path the current missile takes (due to simplicities in guidance currently) is going to be reduced somewhat significantly. It is a fairly simple datalink with low HZ and also has limitations in the manual as to what maneuvers can be performed while ensuring guidance. 

 

Secondly, with an aggressive loft, you have the possibility of losing radio datalink connection with the rear antennas. Though INS does have the possibility of bringing it back, referencing the manual, I would not expect it to make aggressive changes as even with radio datalink, as there are references to be cautious of target and ownship aircraft maneuvering that can exceed datalink's control authority. 

With the datalink being radar encoded and that the sidelobes are not strong enough to send the signal. The sidelobes could theoretically be strong enough. But generally speaking, referencing SMEs, launching in configurations not inherently designed for is an easy way to break missiles. 

Now, I should add that a small loft in the range of 10-20 degrees would probably not break the missile. But if we get into the ranges of say 45-70 degrees.... The odds are not favorable unless explicitly allowed by the manual. 

Lastly, if the INS were fully capable and understood the kinematic benefits, why would it not loft itself when needed? (Without the need for manual lofting) No R-27 that was in service at the time (or currently) has shown such evidence. It was a rumored improvement of the 27EM; however, that missile never made it into production or past the prototype stage. 
 

 

And as a note, only the Aim-7MH/P should loft. (aim-120 is also modern enough) The R-27R does not as far as the evidence supports. 

 

If you manually loft one missile and fire the other one straight, they will impact at roughly the same time 

So manual lofting does not improve time to impact, but it does improve energy at impact 

The limit here is the 60 second turbogenerator. At about 50-70 km for 27R and 70-90 km for 27ER, you will hit this limit wether you loft or not 

It seems to me that Soviet Fox 1 design theory centered around having your missile beat the opponents missile in speed, so that their missile loses support before it can reach you. Having a straight trajectory maximizes this, as lofting is using rocket power to gain altitude and fly slower, and thus be more efficient. 
 

So I think even if the Soviets were quite aware of lofting, they might’ve seen it as having little benefit, maybe detrimental, and adding additional complexity in deciding how to activate it and such 

I have also found mention in AIM-7F documents of manually lofting it and its benefits, perhaps the Soviets were aware of this perhaps not 

I have also learned from DCS to never underestimate what the Soviets might leave out or ignore in the name of simplicity or tradition 

[ShadowFrost]

8 minutes ago, Irisz said:

This is the real operating principle, I think the developers know this better because they have all the documents, even secret ones that we cannot see. The MiG-29 pilot on the forum doesn't really like to talk about weapons either because it's secret! So guessing and fabricating theories is the worst.

Anyway, if a missile is lost, a new missile has to be launched, and usually these missile launches can be visually detected and tracked to see what happens. If they do not go to the destination or the driving to the destination is interrupted. I play quite a lot on the GS server where these missiles are the main game tools and the players have enough reasons that the R-27ER is not among the popular missiles. Some treat this memory mode as if they were going into battle with only one missile. Boredom often leads people to convulsively get involved in something that is not so important. If there are enough missiles, you have to use them!This is a Flaming Cliffs product anyway, not the MiG-29 with a fully clickable cockpit, where I think the developers will deal with this, because every detail is important to get a real MiG-29!

 

The aspect about "breaking the missile by lofting 50 degrees" is verbatim from an SME in internal discussions elsewhere. You can't just use missiles in ways they weren't designed. Even those that do loft inherently may not be able to be manually lofted. Using aggressive manual lofts is a somewhat recent addition, which you can find footage of in the early 2000s. 

3 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

 

If you manually loft one missile and fire the other one straight, they will impact at roughly the same time 

So manual lofting does not improve time to impact, but it does improve energy at impact 

The limit here is the 60 second turbogenerator. At about 50-70 km for 27R and 70-90 km for 27ER, you will hit this limit wether you loft or not 

It seems to me that Soviet Fox 1 design theory centered around having your missile beat the opponents missile in speed, so that their missile loses support before it can reach you. Having a straight trajectory maximizes this, as lofting is using rocket power to gain altitude and fly slower, and thus be more efficient. 
 

So I think even if the Soviets were quite aware of lofting, they might’ve seen it as having little benefit, maybe detrimental, and adding additional complexity in deciding how to activate it and such 

I have also found mention in AIM-7F documents of manually lofting it and its benefits, perhaps the Soviets were aware of this perhaps not 

I have also learned from DCS to never underestimate what the Soviets might leave out or ignore in the name of simplicity or tradition 

I would like to see the documents if you would like to PM them. I would imagine english bias could be used as a poor man's loft. But even then, english bias is going to significantly reduce the effectiveness of the loft because it will point the missile toward the target for the aim-7 to acquire. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Irisz]

3 perccel ezelőtt ShadowFrost azt mondta:

A „rakéta 50 fokos emeléssel történő feltörése” szempontja szó szerint egy kis- és középvállalkozástól származik a máshol folytatott belső megbeszélések során. A rakétákat nem lehet csak úgy használni, ahogyan nem tervezték. Előfordulhat, hogy még azokat sem lehet kézzel emelni, amelyek természetüknél fogva magasra helyezkednek. A kézi tetőterek használata egy kissé újdonság, amelyről a 2000-es évek elején találhat felvételeket. 

Why do you loft a missile whose gimbal limit is +-55 degrees to 50 degrees? You make it difficult for the missile to operate, the carrier's job is to guide the missile!

[AeriaGloria]

3 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

The aspect about "breaking the missile by lofting 50 degrees" is verbatim from an SME in internal discussions elsewhere. You can't just use missiles in ways they weren't designed. Even those that do loft inherently may not be able to be manually lofted. Using aggressive manual lofts is a somewhat recent addition, which you can find footage of in the early 2000s. 

I would like to see the documents if you would like to PM them. I would imagine english bias could be used as a poor man's loft. But even then, english bias is going to significantly reduce the effectiveness of the loft because it won't follow a perfectly ballistic trajectory for long 

 

I’ll send them, but it isn’t much. One interesting way I believe Kh-25/29 do it is by flying level, then when target is 6 degrees below horizon the missile switches to proportional guidance which gives it a curve/slide into the target 

[ShadowFrost]

10 minutes ago, Irisz said:

Why do you loft a missile whose gimbal limit is +-55 degrees to 50 degrees? You make it difficult for the missile to operate, the carrier's job is to guide the missile!

It's just what's allowed currently. The missile will have no trouble finding its way home as currently. 

9 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

I’ll send them, but it isn’t much. One interesting way I believe Kh-25/29 do it is by flying level, then when target is 6 degrees below horizon the missile switches to proportional guidance which gives it a curve/slide into the target 

Thanks, but I do expect when (if) we get english bias for the aim-7 they (being non-MH/P variants) won't manually loft super well anymore. And I'm not aware of an option to disable english bias. 


And for those that don't know, English bias is a preprogrammed turn towards target of the missile for the seeker on the aim-7 to acquire. Used as early as the aim-7e and should help significantly in the F-4's case with missiles not acquiring in close range WVR combat. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Irisz]

12 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

It's just what's allowed currently. The missile will have no trouble finding its way home as currently. 

Thanks, but I do expect when (if) we get english bias for the aim-7 they won't manually loft super well anymore. And I'm not aware of an option to disable english bias. 


And for those that don't know, English bias is a preprogrammed turn towards target of the missile for the seeker on the aim-7 to acquire. Used as early as the aim-7e and should help significantly in the F-4's case with missiles not acquiring in close range WVR combat. 

 

And if the target covers his nose down aggressively? I usually do this, I even make the work of the radar more difficult with it, why do you think that the rocket feels better with a loft of 50 degrees?

The loft is ideal for the AIM 120C because it has a range of 160 km and a much longer battery life, just like the PL-12!

R-27ER is a stupid missile with huge energy and nothing more, I have never seen R-27ER and loft topic officially just fantasizing and making theories.

Please don't confuse Soviet missiles with what an American is doing!

It makes no sense to fantasize about something you can't prove! An R-27AE prototype missile would make more sense because it is based on modern ARH technology, and the technology of the stupid R-27ER shows why everyone switched to ARH guidance in the future!

Edited September 29, 2024 by Irisz

[ShadowFrost]

18 minutes ago, Irisz said:

And if the target covers his nose down aggressively? I usually do this, I even make the work of the radar more difficult with it, why do you think that the rocket feels better with a loft of 50 degrees?

The loft is ideal for the AIM 120C because it has a range of 160 km and a much longer battery life, just like the PL-12!

R-27ER is a stupid missile with huge energy and nothing more, I have never seen R-27ER and loft topic officially just fantasizing and making theories.

Please don't confuse Soviet missiles with what an American is doing!

It makes no sense to fantasize about something you can't prove! An R-27AE prototype missile would make more sense because it is based on modern ARH technology, and the technology of the stupid R-27ER shows why everyone switched to ARH guidance in the future!

 

You keep arguing in such a manner that, as far as seen, is not allowed per the manual. 

I'm not sure if its a translation issue, but it sometimes sounds like you think I am arguing the R-27 is a extremely smart missile. I have simply stated, that with better modeling, we will have a basic datalink which is not going to be as optimal as what we can do currently. Both the HZ documented in the 9.12 manual, as well as other documents, indicate the radio correction is relatively simple and with limitations. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[Irisz]

8 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

You keep arguing in such a manner that, as far as seen, is not allowed per the manual. 

I'm not sure if its a translation issue, but it sometimes sounds like you think I am arguing the R-27 is a extremely smart missile. I have simply stated, that with better modeling, we will have a basic datalink which is not going to be as optimal as what we can do currently. Both the HZ documented in the 9.12 manual, as well as other documents, indicate the datalink is relatively simple. 

You can create theories on a forum, but I've debated with developers many times, and they've often proven me wrong when I tried to argue using my own invented theories. There’s a simple rule: if you make a claim, you need to prove that it works. If you can't, then it's just speculation, and the discussion shifts into an emotional one, where instead of providing solid evidence, you're trying to defend your feelings.

For years, I argued with people who confused the R-27ER imitator missile with the PL-12 missile, even though there hasn’t been a PL-12 missile for the J-11A. If I had presented a detailed explanation of how the PL-12 was developed, how outdated the N001 radar technology is, and that no new missile has been created for it in the past 25 years, it still wouldn't have mattered. People who cling to invented theories tend to push their ideas emotionally, regardless of whether they make sense or not.

I would prefer if the developers placed greater importance on the fun nature of the Flaming Cliffs product and addressed the recurring forum discussion that resurfaces every two months, which won’t go away until a developer resolves the issue of 'REDside's planes being outdated.'

The whole radar memory problem started because the developers, perhaps out of boredom, decided to simulate more detailed radar operations. While attention to detail can be a good thing, in the case of the Flaming Cliffs series, it has made the gameplay experience worse. The detailed radar simulation shouldn’t have been implemented—it would have been better to leave it as it was. Instead, the focus should be on creating more modern homing heads for the R-27T, R-27ET, and R-73 missiles. We've long moved past the 1990s, and these missiles have since been modernized. Yet, we’re not seeing progress on the RED side, while only more advanced NATO equipment continues to appear.

That said, I’ll leave this topic to the developers. They know best what to do. I’ve already shared plenty of ideas on the forum, offering a wide range of suggestions for what could be added to improve the Flanker and FC Fulcrum experience!

Flaming Cliffs is not about detail, if detail is needed then make these planes with fully clickable cockpits, those who want to have fun and feel good in the game should keep playing Flaming Cliffs and don't implement such game breaking features into the gameplay that cause further problems creates and takes away development time from the developers because these problems also need a solution. So if the developers were to deal with this, DCS World would be more successful and have more players, which, we know, means more money!

[ShadowFrost]

12 minutes ago, Irisz said:

You can create theories on a forum, but I've debated with developers many times, and they've often proven me wrong when I tried to argue using my own invented theories. There’s a simple rule: if you make a claim, you need to prove that it works. If you can't, then it's just speculation, and the discussion shifts into an emotional one, where instead of providing solid evidence, you're trying to defend your feelings.

For years, I argued with people who confused the R-27ER imitator missile with the PL-12 missile, even though there hasn’t been a PL-12 missile for the J-11A. If I had presented a detailed explanation of how the PL-12 was developed, how outdated the N001 radar technology is, and that no new missile has been created for it in the past 25 years, it still wouldn't have mattered. People who cling to invented theories tend to push their ideas emotionally, regardless of whether they make sense or not.

I would prefer if the developers placed greater importance on the fun nature of the Flaming Cliffs product and addressed the recurring forum discussion that resurfaces every two months, which won’t go away until a developer resolves the issue of 'REDside's planes being outdated.'

The whole radar memory problem started because the developers, perhaps out of boredom, decided to simulate more detailed radar operations. While attention to detail can be a good thing, in the case of the Flaming Cliffs series, it has made the gameplay experience worse. The detailed radar simulation shouldn’t have been implemented—it would have been better to leave it as it was. Instead, the focus should be on creating more modern homing heads for the R-27T, R-27ET, and R-73 missiles. We've long moved past the 1990s, and these missiles have since been modernized. Yet, we’re not seeing progress on the RED side, while only more advanced NATO equipment continues to appear.

That said, I’ll leave this topic to the developers. They know best what to do. I’ve already shared plenty of ideas on the forum, offering a wide range of suggestions for what could be added to improve the Flanker and FC Fulcrum experience!

Flaming Cliffs is not about detail, if detail is needed then make these planes with fully clickable cockpits, those who want to have fun and feel good in the game should keep playing Flaming Cliffs and don't implement such game breaking features into the gameplay that cause further problems creates and takes away development time from the developers because these problems also need a solution. So if the developers were to deal with this, DCS World would be more successful and have more players, which, we know, means more money!

There have not been many theories created here, most of my arguments are in direct reference to discussions with SMEs and how we in DCS assume certain options which are not valid methods of operation. Similar to the LOAL controversy with both the R-27 and the Aim-7, they are absolutely not valid tactics due to how the missiles are harmonized with the radar but many in DCS belive them to be. 


And I agree with most of what you have said, we can very much use additions such as the R-77-1, 120A, 120C-7, and PL-15 or etc. Or also options like the R-27R1 or similar for more scenarios. More variation in our environment is desperately needed. 

Edited September 29, 2024 by ShadowFrost

[AeriaGloria]

49 minutes ago, Irisz said:

Why do you loft a missile whose gimbal limit is +-55 degrees to 50 degrees? You make it difficult for the missile to operate, the carrier's job is to guide the missile!

 

53 minutes ago, ShadowFrost said:

The aspect about "breaking the missile by lofting 50 degrees" is verbatim from an SME in internal discussions elsewhere. You can't just use missiles in ways they weren't designed. Even those that do loft inherently may not be able to be manually lofted. Using aggressive manual lofts is a somewhat recent addition, which you can find footage of in the early 2000s. 

I would like to see the documents if you would like to PM them. I would imagine english bias could be used as a poor man's loft. But even then, english bias is going to significantly reduce the effectiveness of the loft because it will point the missile toward the target for the aim-7 to acquire. 

 

SMEs can make mistakes, forget, or mis hear the question MiG-29 manual states R-27R/ER has up to 50 degree off boresight ability. Whether this is in semi active or radio correction, it is not stated. If you forced it to fire in that 5 degrees difference between off boresight ability and gimbal limit, maybe?