Aim54 is not exactly agile

[Ddg1500]

Aim54 is not exactly a very agile missile like amrram, it probably designed to hit bombers only, it doesn’t seems to be able to pull a lot G, and honestly so far I haven’t hit anything with it yet

[WarthogOsl]

6 hours ago, Ddg1500 said:

Aim54 is not exactly a very agile missile like amrram, it probably designed to hit bombers only, it doesn’t seems to be able to pull a lot G, and honestly so far I haven’t hit anything with it yet

If it's rocket motor is still burning, it can pull quite a lot of G.  On a shorter range shot, say within 15 miles, it's at least as agile as a Sparrow (and much more chaff resistant).

[Despayre]

Telephone poles aren't often noted for their nimbleness (and it WAS designed to hit bombers [at long range]!).  

Edited October 30, 2024 by Despayre

[LanceCriminal86]

Oh, this again. Cue that beautiful bean footage of a 54C from 1984 in an ACM shot definitely not being an un-agile bomber only missile at the 7:20 mark:
 

 

[Joch1955]

It is really made for BVR, I have been practicing 1v1 against veteran SU27 AI and when fired head on at 30-35 miles out at 25-30k altitude, I am consistently getting a one shot kill 3 times out of 4. You just have to know it’s strength and weaknesses.

[The_Tau]

I would say its more a thin air missile. If bandit is high and most importantly you are high (40k feet launch alt) then 54 is indeed very dangerous missile to even fighters at 70nm out.

Thing is that AI cheats with its RWR and always detect missile at 10nm no matter what and no matter how <profanity>ty RWR it has 

[draconus]

On 10/30/2024 at 12:20 AM, Ddg1500 said:

honestly so far I haven’t hit anything with it yet

Everybody starts somewhere. Don't treat it like AMRAAM. Shot fast, shot high, shot at far ranges.

[Karon]

I mean, it's not that no one has ever talked about the actual in-game missile performance ever, eh...

Missile kinematics I/II: https://flyandwire.com/2023/06/09/missiles-kinematics-part-i-time-factor-and-loft/

Missile kinematics III: https://flyandwire.com/2023/07/27/missiles-kinematics-part-ii-cold-war-era/

Video about the "best" Phoenix variant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9V_A1gjiKE

DCS missile performance visualised: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urL9PKusXho

And there's a lot more, Google helps.

[TomcatFan1976]

I think the Phoenix in game is not anywhere near the real thing. And, NO the Phoenix was not only for bombers. It was one of the primary missions, but it was also designed for fight sized targets and cruise missiles. Just watch the 6 on 6 test where they fired 6 phoenix missiles at 6 drones of various speeds and altitudes and the missile had direct hits on 4 out of 6, and according to one designer from the Modern Marvels Tomcat Sunset show, the other 2 were close and resulted from the drones being faulty. Now before everyone yells at me for that, He said it on the show, not me. Although I do think the performance in game is drastically reduced and was a far more deadly missile than portrayed in game. Maybe people were complaining it was too good and was unfair. IDK, but IMHO i think it was way better that it is....Just my 2 cents

[The_Tau]

@TomcatFan1976those targets in 6 on 6 test were not maneuvering. They just were flying straight and I believe our 54 in DCS also be able to more less recreate same effectiveness. They will hit at 0.8 mach but they will hit. Did real life test told you at what speeds those 54s hit their 4 targets? 

 

Second I believe our 54 in game is very much effective vs the fighter threat they could possibly face namely MiG21/23/25/29/31 or Su-22/24/27 with regular R27R/T missiles. The reason is simply that F14 is only aircraft with Fox3 missile in period until 1991 and thats when Soviet Union dissolved and stopped being a threat. Issues in DCS are a) People fight it vs NATO 2005 F-15E/16/18 set up with JHMCS equipped, AIM120C(introduced in 2000)/AIM9X missile loaded aircraft, with simplified RWR simulation while flying at best 1987 F14B with 1986 54C. So yea you are outdated in this scenario. Bring jets to 1987 with their 1987 loadout and you will see how OP the F14 is. 

and b) AI in DCS is all seeing and knowing OP entity that can magically detect 54 or even aim7 exactly when missile is exactly 10nm from them, just based on 4 puny lights in their SPO-10 RWR. So fighting BVR against them is very gamey when you can see how AI is blatantly cheating

Edited November 25, 2024 by The_Tau

[Nealius]

On 10/31/2024 at 1:35 AM, Joch1955 said:

It is really made for BVR, I have been practicing 1v1 against veteran SU27 AI and when fired head on at 30-35 miles out at 25-30k altitude

Just yesterday I made a 34nm shot from 31k on a non-maneuving F-4, head on, at 22k. My shot was kinematically defeated by a lazy 1G 180-degree turn at around 15-17nm. I guess I accidentally discovered its MAR?

[Mr_sukebe]

16 minutes ago, Nealius said:

Just yesterday I made a 34nm shot from 31k on a non-maneuving F-4, head on, at 22k. My shot was kinematically defeated by a lazy 1G 180-degree turn at around 15-17nm. I guess I accidentally discovered its MAR?

Was it non-manoeuvring, or was it turning?

[Nealius]

12 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Was it non-manoeuvring, or was it turning?

Drone in racetrack orbit, set to ignore all threats. It was non-maneuvering in the straight leg when I took the shot. While the missile was airborne, the drone happened to hit its turning leg, which I don't count as defensive maneuvering because it was a 1G airliner turn, not a high-G defensive maneuver. 

[draconus]

6 hours ago, Nealius said:

Drone in racetrack orbit, set to ignore all threats. It was non-maneuvering in the straight leg when I took the shot. While the missile was airborne, the drone happened to hit its turning leg, which I don't count as defensive maneuvering because it was a 1G airliner turn, not a high-G defensive maneuver. 

So it was notched accidentally

[ruxtmp]

7 hours ago, draconus said:

So it was notched accidentally

Most if not close to all my AIM-54 shots get notched by AI greater than Rookie skill at almost any range. Pretty much holds true for all radar guided missiles (SARH & ARH) in game though so at least its consistent.

[Mr_sukebe]

Just a thought, but that's actually quite interesting.  By inference, if you setup your friendly AWACs or tanker to do the same, does that mean that they're far less likely to get hit by long-range SAM and AAMs?

[Nealius]

7 hours ago, draconus said:

So it was notched accidentally

F6 view showed it still tracking from the drone's rear aspect during the turn, so it wasn't notched. It had no energy to intercept, but the nose was still keeping up with the target's azimuth.

Edited November 26, 2024 by Nealius

[WarthogOsl]

On 11/25/2024 at 4:09 AM, Nealius said:

Just yesterday I made a 34nm shot from 31k on a non-maneuving F-4, head on, at 22k. My shot was kinematically defeated by a lazy 1G 180-degree turn at around 15-17nm. I guess I accidentally discovered its MAR?

FWIW, shots between 20-30nm were generally considered a no-go for the Phoenix in real life.  On a shorter range shot, where the missile doesn't loft, you really need it to be burning its motor almost all the way to the target. 

[Nealius]

So 40nm and over are better? I tried a shot at 45nm but the missile refused to launch until I got to 34nm.

[draconus]

6 hours ago, Nealius said:

I tried a shot at 45nm but the missile refused to launch until I got to 34nm.

How is that? No valid radar lock/track?

[WarthogOsl]

7 hours ago, Nealius said:

So 40nm and over are better? I tried a shot at 45nm but the missile refused to launch until I got to 34nm.

Either launch under 20 or somewhere over 30.  I can't see why you wouldn't be able to launch if you had either a TWS track or radar lock (or a jam angle track).  There aren't any restrictions about range on launching.

[Nealius]

Yeah I don't know why I couldn't get the shot. The TWS auto track looked good. Maybe I pressed the MSL Prep button too close to the engagement time.

[The_Tau]

5 minutes ago, Nealius said:

Yeah I don't know why I couldn't get the shot. The TWS auto track looked good. Maybe I pressed the MSL Prep button too close to the engagement time.

That would be a problem. On ACM panel you can see white squares under stations which are ready to fire (checked square is the station which will fire next). black squares = missile is not ready/not loaded/empty

[DD_Fenrir]

Was using Phoenix in my squad's MP session last night.

Here's the summary of the engagements, all AIM-54C Mk. 47.

1. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 40nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.95, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
2. MiG-29, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 38nm, Launch altitude: ~32,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.00, 25° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
3. MiG-29, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 42nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.00, 25° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
4. MiG-23, Hot @ ~32,000ft; Launch range: 40nm, Launch altitude: ~36,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
5. MiG-23, Hot @ ~32,000ft; Launch range: 44nm, Launch altitude: ~36,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Track extrapolated prior to pitbull. Target survived.
6. MiG-29, Hot @ ~28,000ft; Launch range: 35nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Track extrapolated prior to pitbull. Target survived.
7. MiG-29, Hot @ ~28,000ft; Launch range: 42nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target performed sliceback on missile pitbull. Target survived.
8. MiG-23, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 41nm, Launch altitude: ~32,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
9. MiG-23, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 45nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target performed split-S on missile pitbull. Target survived.
10. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 35nm, Launch altitude: ~30,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.95, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
11. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 39nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
12. MiG-29, Cold @ ~8,000ft; Launch range: 9nm, Launch altitude: ~12,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.10, 30° manual loft. Target break turn on missile pitbull. Target survived.

That's a 58% Pk.

Admittedly this better than it has been some evenings, but just goes to show.

My guess is that the reaction of the AI has a very substantial effect on PK; this depends on the AI targets skill and evasion settings. I still believe they are too omniscient when it comes to knowing when they are under attack but also exactly which sector the threat missile is attacking from and can be unrealistically precise in defeating missiles.

[The_Tau]

52 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Was using Phoenix in my squad's MP session last night.

Here's the summary of the engagements, all AIM-54C Mk. 47.

1. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 40nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.95, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
2. MiG-29, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 38nm, Launch altitude: ~32,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.00, 25° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
3. MiG-29, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 42nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.00, 25° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
4. MiG-23, Hot @ ~32,000ft; Launch range: 40nm, Launch altitude: ~36,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
5. MiG-23, Hot @ ~32,000ft; Launch range: 44nm, Launch altitude: ~36,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Track extrapolated prior to pitbull. Target survived.
6. MiG-29, Hot @ ~28,000ft; Launch range: 35nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Track extrapolated prior to pitbull. Target survived.
7. MiG-29, Hot @ ~28,000ft; Launch range: 42nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target performed sliceback on missile pitbull. Target survived.
8. MiG-23, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 41nm, Launch altitude: ~32,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
9. MiG-23, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 45nm, Launch altitude: ~35,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target performed split-S on missile pitbull. Target survived.
10. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 35nm, Launch altitude: ~30,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.95, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
11. MiG-25, Hot @ ~30,000ft; Launch range: 39nm, Launch altitude: ~33,000ft, Launch Speed: M0.90, 30° manual loft. Target cranked on missile pitbull. Destroyed.
12. MiG-29, Cold @ ~8,000ft; Launch range: 9nm, Launch altitude: ~12,000ft, Launch Speed: M1.10, 30° manual loft. Target break turn on missile pitbull. Target survived.

That's a 58% Pk.

Admittedly this better than it has been some evenings, but just goes to show.

My guess is that the reaction of the AI has a very substantial effect on PK; this depends on the AI targets skill and evasion settings. I still believe they are too omniscient when it comes to knowing when they are under attack but also exactly which sector the threat missile is attacking from and can be unrealistically precise in defeating missiles.

very interesting. I think you can easily increase PK by 10% of you fire from 40k alt. 5k ft actually makes quite a difference in my experience