Ракеты в DCS

[dundun92]

16 minutes ago, Кош said:

Dollars, so 120 has a pure INS stage like R-24??? Thought it's always supported until active. At least that was my impression from DCS.

Edited March 23, 2021 by dundun92

[Кош]

3 минуты назад, TaxDollarsAtWork сказал:

I am not sure what you mean here. INS+DL Phase similarly to how it works in the R-24/27/7P family where they can guide onto targets before the seeker can see them?

Yes it does, and can be unsupported before the active phase and still attempt to guess where the target is most likely to show up and go active there.

 

Though this isn't nearly as consistent and reliable as supporting till active as I understand.

Its is a situational tactic, but an option nonetheless.

 

I mean, of course, if support is off, it uses INS. My question is if the platform can support the 120 at any range, or it;s support range is much shorter than range till active?

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

4 minutes ago, Кош said:

I mean, of course, if support is off, it uses INS. My question is if the platform can support the 120 at any range, or it;s support range is much shorter than range till active?

As far as I'm aware there isn't a real limit in terms of range, the only limit I believe is a fighter supports the AMRAAM for about 90 seconds

[dundun92]

15 minutes ago, Кош said:

My question is if the platform can support the 120 at any range, or it;s support range is much shorter than range till active?

Are you asking if there is a maximum launch range beyond which the launching radar cannot support the AMRAAM, and instead it goes pure INS? If so, Im not aware of any specific limitations in this regard. -34s ive seen make no mention of limitations in this regard. As tax mentioned above, the main limitation is the 80 sec of max datalink transmission, likely because of missile battery life constraints:

Edited March 23, 2021 by dundun92

[FoxAlfa]

35 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

60% Pk from what? 60% Pk because of target manoeuvring? 60% Pk because of ECM? 60% Pk because of target chaffing? without specifics contextless Pk numbers dont mean anything, certainly not a basis to call something OP

Ask him.... he knows better than me, he trained, went to war, and shot down a MiG... 

35 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

But I havent seen any specific evidence that seeing hot aspect fighters at 8nm is somehow OP or unrealistic.

I am quite sure it is quite possible against hot target against the sky but ours does that in valleys on cold close to notch.
If you continue to listen to the interview longer, you will see that the guy's radio didn't even work all the time... and one would think we figured that out after 70-90 years of use. 

My point is lot of our equipment performs like "marketing man's wet dream" without any issue or limitation.

And people keep asking for more capabilities, I say we should push for limitation, since capabilities make nice game, limitations make it a good simulation.

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[dundun92]

22 minutes ago, FoxAlfa said:

Ask him.... he knows better than me, he trained, went to war, and shot down a MiG... 

Just out of curiosity... have you compared the Pk the AMRAAM actually gets in PvP scenarios? Pretty sure its under 60% And for the record, this has a lot to do with stuff other than the AMRAAM itself, such as the employment tactics used. But even from some of the best DCS pilots, you simply arent seeing Pks over 50% unless its against completely unaware targets.

22 minutes ago, FoxAlfa said:

My point is lot of our equipment performs like "marketing man's wet dream" without any issue or limitation.

And people keep asking for more capabilities, I say we should push for limitation, since capabilities make nice game, limitations make it a good simulation.

Fair, and I dont disagree. At the same time though, limitations do need to be realistically modeled, else its often just as bad as not having them (we can see what happens when they aren't with the whole CCM ECM/ECCM in game... its an absolute mess). Unfortunately, finding accurate/specific information on limitations of weapons systems is often a lot harder than finding capabilities. But I think my main point is that vague limitations are not helpful (e.g, the baseless "AIM-54 bad against fighters" rhetoric thats thrown at HB without any specific evidence/basis)

Edited March 23, 2021 by dundun92

[GGTharos]

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

Yes, 120s in underperforming when supported should be much less notchable, but when independent it is overperforming.

 

Says who?

 

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

All pilots talks and Air forces I seen train to support it till impact, and even with support pilots train to expect 60% of a PK, our 120 picks that target 100% of the time at 8nm, so big overperformance.

 

And I have seen pilots train for cheapshots.  What now?   I'm not kidding or trying to be contrary.

 

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

Based on talks and I find that 120 and R-77 should behave more like less notchabe SARHs you can drop support if needed and still expect some chance to hit than the current Independent Hunter-Killers we have. ARH with new gens and two way DL are getting to Hunter-Killers but not ones we have in DCS.

 

I'm not considering any of that new stuff.   The fact is that we don't know the reason for cheapshot tactics, but they definitely exist.  We don't know the effect on the Pk, but if you say 'it'll be less', I will certainly agree with you.

 

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

Yes, they should be applied to all platforms, but currently Viper, Hornet and 120s are being worked on, that is way I am 'stuck' on them.
I am really looking forward to having all weapons made to the same standard, but we are not there yet. 

 

You know very well that we will never be there.  Things will always be out of sync in DCS probably, and everyone will feel 'left behind' at one time or another.

[FoxAlfa]

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

Says who?

Swedish Airforce par example, or every other pilot that got a kill with an Aim120...  they don't train to support the missile just for fun, there must be a reason, and in the video we see one pilot not going cold even drought there is a return shot on him.

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

And I have seen pilots train for cheapshots.  What now?   I'm not kidding or trying to be contrary.

A video, document, or interview might give insight...

 

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

I'm not considering any of that new stuff.   The fact is that we don't know the reason for cheapshot tactics, but they definitely exist.  We don't know the effect on the Pk, but if you say 'it'll be less', I will certainly agree with you.

Cheapshot is exactly that a cheapshot, that might be taken for positioning, missdirection or to turn the opponent. Without more info is hard to tell.

Bottom line currently there is not difference in DCS, but hopeful soon there will be. 

 

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

You know very well that we will never be there.  Things will always be out of sync in DCS probably, and everyone will feel 'left behind' at one time or another.

 Agreed, I only wish something were done in chunks, SARHs all one chunk, then move and do all ARH, etc.... but completely agree there will be always out of sync... 

Edited March 23, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[nighthawk2174]

3 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Just out of curiosity... have you compared the Pk the AMRAAM actually gets in PvP scenarios? Pretty sure its under 60% And for the record, this has a lot to do with stuff other than the AMRAAM itself, such as the employment tactics used. But even from some of the best DCS pilots, you simply arent seeing Pks over 50% unless its against completely unaware targets.

Fair, and I dont disagree. At the same time though, limitations do need to be realistically modeled, else its often just as bad as not having them (we can see what happens when they aren't with the whole CCM ECM/ECCM in game... its an absolute mess). Unfortunately, finding accurate/specific information on limitations of weapons systems is often a lot harder than finding capabilities. But I think my main point is that vague limitations are not helpful (e.g, the baseless "AIM-54 bad against fighters" rhetoric thats thrown at HB without any specific evidence/basis)

 

Yup this exactly, lets be clear the PK of the amraam in game now is trash compared to what it is currently irl.  The INS/Datalink bug, the chaff bug, the ECM bug, weirdness with terminal guidance sometimes causing the missile to miss for no reason at all even on a non-maneuvering target, and a lack of proximity fuzzes all contribute.  Plus I've never really liked using missile PK as a metric to say if a missile is good or not.  For example in Vietnam a later study found that of the missiles that missed something like 60-70%, or more (going from memory here could be a bit off), of misses could be attributed to human error rather.  Poor maintenance, poor loading crews, pilots/wzo's not clearly knowing missile launch limitations are what's meant by human error.  Which is beyond the capabilities of the missile itself but had a massive impact on its pk.  And it didn't help that if you shoot 2 missiles at a target and the first one hits that's technically a 50% pk. And for the amraam how many missed irl because the bandit split-s'd and ran away at full speed back to base, which works against every missile that's not fired within RNE.  Or had 2 missiles fired at one target?  Essentially the tldr in rlf PK is a bad tool to say a missile is over or under performing.  you'd need to analyze every single employment to get an accurate understanding of that number.

Edited March 23, 2021 by nighthawk2174

[GGTharos]

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

A video, document, or interview might give insight...

 

Not going to happen, but I'll give you the known details - it's a pair of fighters attacking a bomber stream OR formation with a 20nm offset.  Before you start trying to draw conclusions, we don't know the reason for the use of this tactic, only that it is a valid tactic.

 

1 hour ago, FoxAlfa said:

Bottom line currently there is not difference in DCS, but hopeful soon there will be. 

 

Sure there is.  Cheap-shotting a 120 can leave it flying into space, which shouldn't happen - and that's just an obvious one.   There's no capture basket or gates for target capture simulated at all, but as long as the missile is getting no data when cheap-shotted, even with its currently huge search zone a target would be far enough that yep, the missile will see it, but the maneuver required to intercept will have the missile dropping out of the sky.  Yes, it's a major nuisance on your RWR ... but as you've pointed out, there aren't enough RWR nuissances out there as is.

4 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Pretty much all digital actives do this, though there have been some extremely rare instances where a customer opts out of this option

 

The brits wanted to opt out but they decided that they wanted the full 120 Pk, not the 7 Pk (apparently that's what the Pk dropped to if not using the DL)

 

 

4 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

And of course its active range not being dependent upon RCS of the target and aspect/closure.

 

No missile in game does this, but yes, it's a generic missile thing, much like instead of having capture baskets or other parameters it's just to attack objectId#####

 

[BlackPixxel]

15 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

Sure there is.  Cheap-shotting a 120 can leave it flying into space, which shouldn't happen - and that's just an obvious one.   There's no capture basket or gates for target capture simulated at all, but as long as the missile is getting no data when cheap-shotted, even with its currently huge search zone a target would be far enough that yep, the missile will see it, but the maneuver required to intercept will have the missile dropping out of the sky.  Yes, it's a major nuisance on your RWR ... but as you've pointed out, there aren't enough RWR nuissances out there as is.

 

 

Last time I checked the Aim-120 in DCS was still able to find a target if support was cancelled a little later and the target did not maneuver.

The main issue right now is that the loft is not completed. So as soon as support is dropped, it will keep its current direction, which is upwards if the support is dropped to early.

 

This and the ECM bug are some issues that ED will hopefully solve soon.

[dundun92]

Just now, BlackPixxel said:

Last time I checked the Aim-120 in DCS was still able to find a target if support was cancelled a little later and the target did not maneuver.

yes it can, and it should. But the problem isnt really the loft per se. Its the fact that there is no INS/Inertial Active guidance at all; the problems with the loft are only the symptoms of the basic issue. The missile should fly to the last extrapolated target position, not fly in the same direction as when the support was lost. This could become problematic when you take into account that the AMRAAM uses variable PN, which can cause medium-long shots, even in the absence of loft, to miss because if support is dropped in the variable PN stage, straight ahead isnt an intercept course, and may or may not be inside the 15° FoV. Agsinst fast-ish beaming targets this could definitely be an issue.

[Fuerte]

7 hours ago, FoxAlfa said:

You guys got it backward. It is not that R-27 is underperforming, it is that Aim120 and launch platforms are overperforming. 
 

The R-27 family will be much better when the bugs are fixed (also if fuse is factored in R-27R will be much better so you want need to haul heavy ERs). I do hope R-77 also get a bit of time and loft.

 

But now you should be pushing for fixes on the Aim120 and the platforms. Instant pickup at max active range for 120, or high overG during instable launch mass shift. 

For the platforms, less reliable RWR with ghosts, misidentification, angle errors, stronger signals hiding weaker, jamming, realistic ranges on the radars, TWS errors and target drops, TWS single ping DL donations, launch delay for Hornet, 13g pulls for Eagle, Viper overspeed etc ... while ED is "in the shop" for Hornet and Viper. It will be much harder to get those fixed later too and all those things give much bigger advantage then 5 or 10 km in range. 

 

And dont forget to implement all this stuff for FC3 modules as well. 

[Ватрушка]

Есть цифры пусков Р-27 по МиГ-29 в эфиопо-эритрейском конфликте. 27 пусков и только 1 фраг. Точность Р-27 по МиГ-29 менее 4%.

Цифры пусков AIM-120 по МиГ-29 в Югославии легко находятся в гугле, даже Чиж давно приводил. Точность AIM-120, всех тамошних модификаций, по МиГ-29 >0,7.

В 17.5 раз AIM-120 точнее Р-27, в ДКС эта разница существенно меньше, опять совков для электората переапали.

[Vladimir_V_T]

Кстати, у реальной AIM-120C пять модификаций. Какая из них представлена в DCS? Сори, если это кто-то уже спрашивал.

[Jack1nthecrack]

28 minutes ago, Ватрушка said:

There are numbers of R-27 launches on MiG-29s in the Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict. 27 launches and only 1 frag. The accuracy of the R-27 on the MiG-29 is less than 4%.

The numbers of the AIM-120 launches on the MiG-29 in Yugoslavia are easily found in Google, even Chizh has been citing for a long time. Accuracy of AIM-120, all modifications there, according to MiG-29> 0.7.

The AIM-120 is 17.5 times more accurate than the R-27, in the DCS this difference is much less, again there were scoops for the electorate.

In what parameters were these R-27s launched? 

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

32 minutes ago, Vladimir_V_T said:

Кстати, у реальной AIM-120C пять модификаций. Какая из них представлена в DCS? Сори, если это кто-то уже спрашивал.

Our in game one is a 120C5

[HWasp]

 

I know, this is the IR version, but does not look like a joke missile to me...

Never seen any detailed info about what happened during that Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict.

[dundun92]

3 minutes ago, HWasp said:

 

I know, this is the IR version, but does not look like a joke missile to me...

Never seen any detailed info about what happened during that Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict.

Then again, I did see footage of an AIM-9E(?) kill online somewhere, must not be too bad of a missile ...

[HWasp]

I was replying to the comment about that 4 percent hit rate in a largely unkown conflict. Maybe it is not the best way to judge the weapon?

Maybe it is also not the best way to judge the aim-120 performance by some totally asymmetric conflict vs completely outnumbered and outgunned enemy with close to zero SA, basically just flying target for them.

[dundun92]

7 minutes ago, HWasp said:

I was replying to the comment about that 4 percent hit rate in a largely unkown conflict. Maybe it is not the best way to judge the weapon?

Maybe it is also not the best way to judge the aim-120 performance by some totally asymmetric conflict vs completely outnumbered and outgunned enemy with close to zero SA, basically just flying target for them.

Ah fair enough, wasnt paying enough attention

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

1 hour ago, Ватрушка said:

Есть цифры пусков Р-27 по МиГ-29 в эфиопо-эритрейском конфликте. 27 пусков и только 1 фраг. Точность Р-27 по МиГ-29 менее 4%.

Цифры пусков AIM-120 по МиГ-29 в Югославии легко находятся в гугле, даже Чиж давно приводил. Точность AIM-120, всех тамошних модификаций, по МиГ-29 >0,7.

В 17.5 раз AIM-120 точнее Р-27, в ДКС эта разница существенно меньше, опять совков для электората переапали.

It probably should also be noted that Pk isn't exactly something to take at face value, threats you are facing (in the case of the AIM-120, lots of those Galebs it killed lacked RWRs), Crew training (The USAF is the gold standard here though it has acknowledged in its own Vietnam reports that crew training influences Pk) and Shot context (Is this an e pole turn signaling shot? is this a defensive launch and leave spoiler shot? is this a supported NEZ shot? Here one could possibly make a case for IR missiles as they all are by their nature shot for maximum Pk)

 

According to this USAF report the AIM-7E from 1965 to 1968 achieved a Pk of 38% compare that to the 3% of the AA-10 and it looks wonderful doesn't it?

 

Now would one really say an Eagle with AIM-7Es facing off against a Flanker or even an Eagle with AA-10s say the former has a BVR advantage over the later?

I don't think so.

Would anyone say the R-73 and AIM-9L are evenly matched in terms of effectiveness because of them both achieved about an 80% Pk

Or even that the AIM-9X is inferior to both since its Pk is only 50%?

 

See how absurd taking Pk at face value is?

[Ватрушка]

1 hour ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

It probably should also be noted that Pk isn't exactly something to take at face value, threats you are facing (in the case of the AIM-120, lots of those Galebs it killed lacked RWRs), Crew training (The USAF is the gold standard here though it has acknowledged in its own Vietnam reports that crew training influences Pk) and Shot context (Is this an e pole turn signaling shot? is this a defensive launch and leave spoiler shot? is this a supported NEZ shot? Here one could possibly make a case for IR missiles as they all are by their nature shot for maximum Pk)

Причем тут Галебы, если речь исключительно о МиГ-29?

1 hour ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

According to this USAF report the AIM-7E from 1965 to 1968 achieved a Pk of 38% compare that to the 3% of the AA-10 and it looks wonderful doesn't it?

Именно так, что достигнуто в США, СССР/РФ достигает через 20+ лет, касается всех отраслей куда не перераспределяются ресурсы с других(в СССР развитие шло экстрактивным путем, а не инклюзивным как в США. More: Daron Acemoglu, James Robinson "Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty"). О каких крутых советских истребителях можно говорить, когда совок не смог в аэродинамику формулы 1? Хороший автомобиль это основа для хорошего самолета, через ветки технологического дерева не перепрыгнешь.

1 hour ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Would anyone say the R-73 and AIM-9L are evenly matched in terms of effectiveness because of them both achieved about an 80% Pk

Or even that the AIM-9X is inferior to both since its Pk is only 50%?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_base_effect

А теперь с новыми знаниями приведите насколько Р-73 лучше 9L и 9X на примере догфайта в реальных войнах.

[TotenDead]

8 часов назад, nighthawk2174 сказал:

Yup this exactly, lets be clear the PK of the amraam in game now is trash compared to what it is currently irl. 

 

Наверное потому что самой совершенной ракетой, которая противостояла Аим-120 была Р-27Р1, ни одного носителя Р-27ЭР аим-120 не сбивали. При этом основная цель амраама - это что-то вроде МиГ-21/23, у которых не только ракеты куда древнее Р-27, так еще и системы на поколение-два примитивнее. Кроме того, сейчас в игре Аим-120 воюют с другими носителями амраамов, что еще больше бьет по вероятности поражения.

[TotenDead]

1 час назад, Ватрушка сказал:

Причем тут Галебы, если речь исключительно о МиГ-29?

С чего это исключительно про МиГ-29? Что за фантазии? Кстати, раз уж ты о них заговорил, у тех МиГов 9.12А были только Р-27Р. Сравнивай их с Ф-16 блок 10/15, у которых вообще не было УРВВ средней дальности)

1 час назад, Ватрушка сказал:

Именно так, что достигнуто в США, СССР/РФ достигает через 20+ лет, касается всех отраслей куда не перераспределяются ресурсы с других(в СССР развитие шло экстрактивным путем, а не инклюзивным как в США. More: Daron Acemoglu, James Robinson "Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty"). О каких крутых советских истребителях можно говорить, когда совок не смог в аэродинамику формулы 1? Хороший автомобиль это основа для хорошего самолета, через ветки технологического дерева не перепрыгнешь.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_base_effect

Это тупой троллинг. Но объясни все же, как же тогда вышло, что Р-77 проходила все испытания параллельно с Aim-120, а не на 20 лет позже?

1 час назад, Ватрушка сказал:

А теперь с новыми знаниями приведите насколько Р-73 лучше 9L и 9X на примере догфайта в реальных войнах.

 

Смотри видео про учебные полеты натовцев против немецких МиГ-29