General comparsion of 120C and ER-27 in 2 sims

[asparagin]

pilots would perform such manuevers only as last chance, before they die.

 

:) .. so much for the last chance..

 

anyway a bit of topic: falcon af files in tacview: is it a bug that sometimes "ascii" appears as a sam launcher when a plane gets wacked? (not always).

[A.S]

:) .. so much for the last chance..

 

anyway a bit of topic: falcon af files in tacview: is it a bug that sometimes "ascii" appears as a sam launcher when a plane gets wacked? (not always).

 

for correct telemetry and data you have to use ingame ACMI player

 

the converted ones are screwed in that means.

[asparagin]

too bad, cause the tacview is really nice and handy, the in game acmi moves slow when panning

[A.S]

too bad, cause the tacview is really nice and handy, the in game acmi moves slow when panning

 

Anisotropic Filtering: ingame ON ...in gfx-card application controled

Renderng: only HAL not T&L & HAL

 

should help....

 

but yes, for biger overviews (battles) tacview is visual more handy.

[borchi_2b]

kuky, do you have an knowledge about physics and math?

 

missles only react to movements, and they can only compute on data they get from the movement of a plane, not vise versa

[Kuky]

I studied Applied Physics at UNI and I have no idea what you mean by this:

 

missles only react to movements, and they can only compute on data they get from the movement of a plane, not vise versa

The last second ditch you think can evade missile with good energy cannot happen... you are forgetting lot of inertia aircraft has as the pilot does the pull... the aircraft will still continue where it was heading for a short time, there is no way pilot can depend on doing this like it can be done in lockon... also in real life the processor of the radar or missile computes lot faster then what the game does.. that is its only function... the game can only do so much processing (depending on game coding) and if increased the framerate goes down so for the game balance it can't be as good as the real thing (not forgetting same is for algorithms) Edited February 13, 2010 by Kuky

[borchi_2b]

what i mean by that is, they can only react, not act, thats the diffrence between a plane and missile, which is in terms of defensive moves and bvr, a mature difference.

 

well when you studied applied physics then you should know that there are many factors why there is a chance to ditch a missile and not been hit by anything of the detonation.

plus in relation the speeds of the plane, the missile and the fragments, take that into account, the time that elapses and then, you will see, a small percentage of damages or even a missile hitting anything. this all depends on energie, that true, but also on ranges and speeds

[Kuky]

Missiles do react yes, but the speed at which they do so are surely quick enough to not allow the last second pull to be effective. Missiles can pull way more G then aircraft and the processing speed of the seeker is surely fast enough to follow aircraft heading... if there are even 1000 calculations every second for trajectory and impact point there is no way a pull by the pilot can defeat missile with energy to pull G like that... so anyway, call this debatable but from my point of view it cannot happen because of physics... having failed processing or something else not working properly (like tracking) can cause it but not pure sudden aircraft heading change as that change is not sudden and large enough.

[A.S]

its nice to read you guys ...but at "ditch a missile" you lost me...

what does that mean?

[borchi_2b]

well the ditching of a missile means, to pull hard g´s in the last momet before impact, so that the missile passes below your plane.

you can do that level, sideways or invertet, does not matter.

 

ok, kuky, we have a real fighterpilot in our virtual squad, and well guess what, they learn stuff like that in theorie, cause in reallife, as far i can recall official sources, this has never happend, cause pilots do not like the idea of fighting against a missle in this regards.

but in theorie hey learn how to defeat a missile and it is all based of energie, inertia timing etc etc etc.

planes have diffrent physical aspect, or possibilities then missiles, which may pull more g´s in reallife then in lomac, but this makes no diffrence, cause in reallife for example, an active aim120 will more likely lock a chaff then a r27er for example, but thatswherewe go, OT, and i do not want to discuss reality over a poor simulation. the best in lomac by far, comared to falcon is the grafics, but thats about all. but lomac is easy, is fun, and alot of stuff is possible when we talk about teamplay etc etc.

 

lets wait till DCS su27 und f15c, then we will se which planes are better, or which pilots can cope with such deaply simulated planes better, cause the workload will be 100 times bigger in DCS then in lomac, as far the can manage to make the planes as realistic as possible

and also thier weapons and radar, which means, notching an f15 radar an totally disappearing from the f15 radar is no magic

[Groove]

What is the purpose of this thread?

[Groove]

ok, kuky, we have a real fighterpilot in our virtual squad, and well guess what, they learn stuff like that in theorie, cause in reallife, as far i can recall official sources, this has never happend, cause pilots do not like the idea of fighting against a missle in this regards.

 

If you mean there is no last second ditch attempt in real life, than you are wrong. But im not quite sure what you write.

[MoGas]

If you mean there is no last second ditch attempt in real life, than you are wrong. But im not quite sure what you write.

 

What I understand, RL pilots learn it in the theorie, but ofcourse the try to avoid it as good as possible, so the let no fighter getting too close.

[Kuky]

No, it is more because they would rather tell the pilot to try best he can rather then not trying it at all thinking it will not work... theory and practice is to work hard the whole time as the missile is inbound to bleed its energy... and if the pilot does it right the missile will not have energy to reach him... but what I am saying is you do not want to do this thinking it might work if the missile is fired on you from close because if you do you will get hit... why pilots do not this? Because it's very bad gamble with your life and unlike in a game you don't get a chance to perfect it ;)

[Groove]

What I understand, RL pilots learn it in the theorie, but ofcourse the try to avoid it as good as possible, so the let no fighter getting too close.

 

In several books pilots stated the being shot upon the always watched their energy and G's to have some reserves for a last second ditch attempt, if necessary.

[GGTharos]

The last ditch maneuver - the orthogonal roll - is a maneuver that is taught to pilots. It can be used against a SAM (you can see it coming) or an AAM (you can sometimes see it coming), but it is one of the evasion techniques, and its name is telling:

 

It's your last change to avoid being hit because either everything else has failed, or you got too close. If the latter, the maneuver is less effective since any modern missile's ability to track your plane and hit it typically exceeds anything you can do with the plane itself, but it's always worth trying. In combination with countermeasures and ECM it might be more effective.

 

Against a low energy missile it should be pretty effective, but usually either impractical (can't see the missile) or not needed (can perform a much simpler maneuver instead).

[GGTharos]

Well, actually... Did you presented the speed curves to talk about?.. ;)

Personally, I have some pretenses to Lock On missile modelling, like:

- overestimated ground clutter affection (that means, the beam maneuver is too effective)

 

Yes, look down seems to just be defined as 'target altitude lower than my altitude) ... it should be just a little more complicated (based on distance to ground in target LOS)

 

- direct flying (no missile AoA at all)

 

Yep, and this mainly affects shoot-up v shoot-down ranges, I think. There are other things (like roll-to-turn vs. skid-to-turn missile simulation) but they are probably a smaller factor in just the very basics of BVR.

 

- undermodelled AIM-120C (though I fly MiG-29C, a strong enemy is always more interesting).

 

While it is undermodeled in range (the B should be insignificantly longer ranged than the R-77, AFAIK/IIRC, the C should have 30% or so better range) I think that all playable radar guided missiles have the major problem of being too sensitive to counter-measures head on. In general you should not be able to decoy a missile without turning to the beam.

 

But there's not much to discuss, IMHO. Either ED fixes that, either they don't.

 

There are a lot of things to 'fix', and what's really needed is a more advanced missile model. But that will come with DCS, so we'll have to wait for that :)

 

In FC 2.0 the problem with ET seekers seems to be addressed, but by expence of adding another trouble - flare ineffectiveness when the heat-seeker is launched in-front. In addition, some fusing problems are obviously also looked through (Chizh gathered data on missile fusing radius a while ago) So, anyways, it worth looking on the update first.

 

I think everyone will be happy with the new fuzes and missile tweaks. Anything that could have been done, has been, IMHO and as a result missiles should be deadlier in FC2.0 just in general. My hope is that we'll no longer see aircraft just hugging the ground or heading straight into a missile shot while dropping CM's ... in fact I'm reasonably certain that attempts to do so in FC2.0 will be met with an explosion in the majority of cases ;)

[Pilotasso]

In those tracks I saw very different perfomance between LOMAc and F4 missiles and their trajectories.

 

maximum speed way different from lockon and trajectories probably have to do with the fact LO ones can plot trajectories outside the missiles seeker limits.

[Groove]

How would a pilot know when to try to pull a last ditch move in real life? They don't know how close/far the missile is from hitting them.

 

If someone can talk to a real pilot and ask him would this work, I'd love to hear what he/she has to say about it.

 

Often missiles can be seen. Especially SAMs. They watch the SAM and manouver the plane to see if it's tracking the plane. A good example of the whole manouver is described in books like about the Strike Eagle fighting in the 2nd Gulf War.

[borchi_2b]

pilotasso, watch close, there is a diffrence in the missles behavior, especially the r27

 

in lomac it would never keep alock at some situations compared to f4.

 

but your statement tells me, that you are really just fklying the f15 in lomac.

 

cya

[RvEYoda]

First you must make it VERY clear which falcon version you are talking about, as they have

completely different modelling and sometimes also numbers.

 

AF missile energy modeling is quite cool, but it hasnt got enough drag when the missile gets slow,

it does seem to behave a little better than OF though where you can fire amraam B

100 nm :). AF does missile energy slightly ( though not much after studying both models in

detail ) better than Lo. It is more difficult to find the "weak spots" in the missile energy in AF,

but they are there if you look enough.

 

AF does a decent job of handling chaff head on(zero), but chaff is not effective (zero) on the beam.

I have gone in and edited some numbers and they would need some orders of

magnitude to be corrected likely. Also AF 120 cannot be notched unless it has a failure ( built into the game )

once it has gone active. The same is true for OF. Many times it is easy to believe you have nothced it, but usually

your bank angles in 3D related to the missiles tracking angle simply throws your RWR off.

 

Overall F16 radar in AF are much too powerful. The F16 radar in AF will produce consistent 60-80 nm

detection range vs fighters in AF ( if you know what you are doing ), which simply

isnt realistic. It should be considerably less.

 

Also AF doesnt really model the doppler notch or look down behaviour that well, which means even

if your target turns notching 40 nm out can likely still lock and track him, hehe..

FF tries to correct this but in my experience it seems that missiles/radars lose lock too easy,

already after a 40 deg turn or so ^^ ( but I can be wrong here )

 

Of course, the advantage in AF v Lo is that in AF it pays off much much more to follow

realistic engagement tactics and team work has a much higher positive effect, while lockon

suits more to the "just got home from work and want to shoot some missiles"

 

I have good hopes FC2 will allow lockon to provide a good playground for both the casual

player and the hardcore/competitive gamer.

Edited February 13, 2010 by =RvE=Yoda

[monotwix]

 

I have good hopes FC2 will allow lockon to provide a good playground for both the casual

player and the hardcore/competitive gamer.

 

Good luck, what have you been doing with LOFC 1.12 so far?

[A.S]

thx everyone for commenting....it is getting interesting :thumbup: I really enjoy to hear various expiriences and opinions too in this matter.

[GGTharos]

But not invisible, and if you make it maneuver it might make itself visible.

[Frostie]

How would a pilot know when to try to pull a last ditch move in real life? They don't know how close/far the missile is from hitting them.

 

A lot of missiles leave trails which is the tell tale sign, how else could a pilot call out a 'fox 2 inbound'. Also anything which moves through the air using a high G maneveur causes a distinct trail as it rips through the air.