Ракеты в DCS

[Flаnker]

9 минут назад, Chizh сказал:

Ты всерьез считаешь что старые полуактивные ракеты могут сравнится по эффективности с АМРААМом? 

 

Смотря какая РЛС самолёта прилагается к этим ракетам. Если брать что-то типа Барса, то вполне себе можно прободаться - так как Су30СМ сможет лететь к цели чуть ли не параллельно цели. Да и если цель использует мощные помехи то РЛС самолёта куда более надежно её сможет сопровождать чем ГСН ракеты.

[Chizh]

51 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

 

 

Раньше - не было. Сейчас каждый летчик выполняет по несколько реальных пусков Р-77-1 в год, значит темпы производства достаточны.

Есть подтверждение?

 

51 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Р-27 возят именно потому что "Every time a missile is flown on a pylon it loses 'shelf life', and if you have a lot of AIM-7s you may as well use them until they are done with, especially in 'low threat' scenarios." Не из бедности.

Р-27 возят именно из бедности и еще по тому что старые самолеты не применяют других.

[Flаnker]

4 минуты назад, Chizh сказал:

Еще один )

 

Может ты нам тогда объяснишь зачем стране с 3-м в мире оборонным (Индия) бюджетом покупать ракеты В-В с ПАРГС?

[Chizh]

1 minute ago, Flаnker said:

 

Смотря какая РЛС самолёта прилагается к этим ракетам. Если брать что-то типа Барса, то вполне себе можно прободаться - так как Су30СМ сможет лететь к цели чуть ли не параллельно цели. Да и если цель использует мощные помехи то РЛС самолёта куда более надежно её сможет сопровождать чем ГСН ракеты.

Если самолет будет светить вбок и уменьшит свою радиальную скорость то у него будет проблемы на фоне земли.

Не нужно сочинять небылиц про РЛС самолета и ГСН ракеты. Р-27 это старые дрова, которые кончатся через некоторое время.

1 minute ago, Flаnker said:

 

Может ты нам тогда объяснишь зачем стране с 3-м в мире оборонным (Индия) бюджетом покупать ракеты В-В с ПАРГС?

Как вариант. У них есть МиГ-29 которые не могут носить другого.

Ну и к РВВ-АЕ у них вагон претензий. Вполне возможно что Р-27 будет где-то надежнее.

[Flаnker]

2 минуты назад, Chizh сказал:

Есть подтверждение?

 

Так то Р-77-1 производят под 200 ракет в год (при водилась такая цифра водном из интервью), ну и МАКС приводил эти данные (про пуски) в соответсвующей теме.

 

2 минуты назад, Chizh сказал:

Р-27 возят именно из бедности и еще по тому что старые самолеты не применяют других.

 

При чем тут старые самолёты, если разговор про те, которые могут применять и Р-27 и Р-77 (Су30МКИ/СМ)?

[Chizh]

7 minutes ago, Flаnker said:

 

Так то Р-77-1 производят под 200 ракет в год (при водилась такая цифра водном из интервью), ну и МАКС приводил эти данные (про пуски) в соответсвующей теме.

Если бы каждый летчик стрелял по несколько Р-77 в год, то я боюсь столь скромного производства не хватило бы. 

И весь запас ракет в ВКС истратили бы на учениях.

 

Quote

При чем тут старые самолёты, если разговор про те, которые могут применять и Р-27 и Р-77 (Су30МКИ/СМ)?

Тогда дело в двух вещах.

1. Р-27 сильно дешевле РВВ-АЕ.

2. РВВ-АЕ имеют проблемы с надежностью и ресурсом, о чем индусы не раз жаловались.

[Max1mus]

7 hours ago, Chizh said:

Эффективность ракет закономерно зависит от поколения. Активные ракеты класса AIM-120 безусловно более эффективны чем устаревшие ракеты семейства Р-27. 

 

Р-27ЭР/ЭТ в игре лучше Р-77. Сильность в комбинации всех этих ракет, но большинство эффективных летчиков изпользуют Р-27 как главную ракету, а Р-77 как бонус. Это потому, что у этой ракеты "нового поколения" нет одного преимущество против амраама. А у Р-27Э хоть есть скорость. Но по словам лётчиков НАТО должна и быть дальность (как раньще в DCS и было), для этого ждём вас.

 

Эффективнсть семиактивной ракеты тоже сильно сависит от качество радара самолета. Можете сделать Р-27ЭР самый лучшый ракеты в игре, но если Су27С или старый МиГ и их РЛС 1980их цель так легко теряют, ракета не далетит.

[TotenDead]

50 минут назад, Chizh сказал:

Если бы каждый летчик стрелял по несколько Р-77 в год, то я боюсь столь скромного производства не хватило бы. 

И весь запас ракет в ВКС истратили бы на учениях.

 

Ну можешь спросить у Макса ещё раз на счёт пусков 77-1.

50 минут назад, Chizh сказал:

 

2. РВВ-АЕ имеют проблемы с надежностью и ресурсом, о чем индусы не раз жаловались.

Да, они большие любители жаловаться по делу и без дела. Но очевидно, что в 2021 экспортная версия ракеты 80-х годов выглядит не особо свежо

57 минут назад, Chizh сказал:

Если самолет будет светить вбок и уменьшит свою радиальную скорость то у него будет проблемы на фоне земли.

 

 

Спорно, зато вот его на фоне земли ни один допплеровский радар не увидит

[Max1mus]

55 minutes ago, Chizh said:

Тогда дело в двух вещах.

1. Р-27 сильно дешевле РВВ-АЕ.

2. РВВ-АЕ имеют проблемы с надежностью и ресурсом, о чем индусы не раз жаловались.

 

Are you talking about the Indian air force? There are countries spending much less on their military, yet they buy the best missiles they possibly can. Why would the Indians complain about RVV-AE effectiveness in their little skrimish, develop their own active missile as a result and then decide: Hey, lets buy even more inferior R-27E missiles!

 

Maybe because they aren't actually more inferior.

Edited March 23, 2021 by Max1mus

[TotenDead]

1 час назад, Chizh сказал:

 

Ты всерьез считаешь что старые полуактивные ракеты могут сравнится по эффективности с АМРААМом? 

 

Конечно, Р-27ЭР вполне себе сравнима с Аим-120А, в плане дальности выглядит даже получше

[FoxAlfa]

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. 

Edited March 23, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

6 minutes 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 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. 

 

I certainly would like Fixes on that front, but EDs response on the F-16 and F/A-18 over performing radar detection has been to lock the thread.

It would be nice for things like Jammers to introduce some INS error for RF missiles even while in burn through and so on

 

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by TaxDollarsAtWork

[KBAC]

1 час назад, Chizh сказал:

Еще один )

Трек?

При случае предоставлю. Хотя толк есть ли, если львиная доля треков из сети ломаются и при воспроизведении действо отклоняется от того, что было на самом деле? Придется долго искать идеальный трек...

Edited March 23, 2021 by KBAC

[Кош]

Амраам имеет ту же моноимпульсную голову, то что он активный это не волшебная кнопка. Рассматривать надо математику наведения, трассировку, есть ли сравнение распределенное во времени итд. ПАРГСН-АРГСН само по себе это лирика а не физика, не интересно. А мы выйдем на интересное - ограничения.

[GGTharos]

4 minutes 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. 

 

No, they didn't.  120s are underperforming in a bunch of ways, and you know this.  Similarly, all the limitations you mentioned should apply to all platforms, so the fact that you're stuck on 120s here while going around saying everything should be the same standards when it benefits R-27s (specifically in this case WRT CFDs and new FM) is at least somewhat peculiar.

[Кош]

4 минуты назад, GGTharos сказал:

 

120s are underperforming in a bunch of ways

I would appreciate a link to a post with documented numbers.

[GGTharos]

7 minutes ago, Kosh said:

Amraham has the same monopulse head, the fact that he is active is not a magic button. It is necessary to consider the mathematics of pointing, tracing, whether there is a comparison distributed in time, etc. PARGSN-ARGSN itself is lyrics and not physics, not interesting. And we will come to an interesting point - restrictions.

 

There is a big difference in guidance capability with digital components in all phases of operation.

2 minutes ago, Kosh said:

I would appreciate a link to a post with documented numbers.

 

You don't need a link, these things happen in game - the missile shouldn't fly into space if the launching platform loses lock for example. The missile has an INU which tells it where to go even without corrections from the launching aircraft.

 

Likewise, these missiles shouldn't receive another missile's data, but they do - there are no separate 'channels' or at least missile-ids simulated for the weapon system that stick to the track against which the missile was launched, or appropriately turn off when the track itself vanishes (or any other action that would reset the track and missile data-link)

Edited March 23, 2021 by GGTharos

[Кош]

8 минут назад, GGTharos сказал:

 

There is a big difference in guidance capability with digital components in all phases of operation.

 

You don't need a link, these things happen in game - the missile shouldn't fly into space if the launching platform loses lock for example. The missile has an INU which tells it where to go even without corrections from the launching aircraft.

 

Likewise, these missiles shouldn't receive another missile's data, but they do - there are no separate 'channels' or at least missile-ids simulated for the weapon system that stick to the track against which the missile was launched, or appropriately turn off when the track itself vanishes (or any other action that would reset the track and missile data-link)

 

I'm sorry Sir, but "Big difference" is not informative. Algorithm1 with these1 formulas VS Algorithm2 with that2 formulas would be informative and bring the discussion to a productive level.

INU is not magical, again. It prolongs the track of lost target and just that. Also present on R-24 and R-27. 

 

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

13 minutes ago, Кош said:

I'm sorry Sir, but "Big difference" is not informative. Algorithm1 with these1 formulas VS Algorithm2 with that2 formulas would be informative and bring the discussion to a productive level.

INU is not magical, again. It prolongs the track of lost target and just that. Also present on R-24 and R-27. 

 

If you want more qualitative measures on how big a leap it is comparing information from non digital missiles that went digital like the AIM-54A to AIM-54C and those pilot accounts are a little telling or open source information on Air Intercept radars like the AWG-9 vs say the APG-63 which are basically the same class of radar.

 

As for the INU its a known capability for the AMRAAM to fly to the last known intercept point when unsupported and seek the target on its own (or what ever it finds there)

 

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

 

I do believe though that Fox Alfa is talking about certain aspects of the AIM-120s kinematics and maneuvering.

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

If something like that can be coded for IR missiles maybe something can also be done for RF ones

Edited March 23, 2021 by TaxDollarsAtWork

[GGTharos]

1 minute ago, Кош said:

I'm sorry Sir, but "Big difference" is not informative. Algorithm1 with these1 formulas VS Algorithm2 with that2 formulas would be informative and bring the discussion to a productive level.

INU is not magical, again. It prolongs the track of lost target and just that. Also present on R-24 and R-27. 

 

You are being unnecessarily pedantic.  Yep, there's a big difference and these things you can read about and speculate about their exact meaning.  No one here is going to know the exact differences, and if they do they won't be talking about them - and you know this.   The simplest level of simulation in DCS here is simply the chaff rejection value for all of this.

 

And yes, INU is not magical but your response isn't reasonable either.   INU should steer the missile where it needs to go, not leave it flying into space.  Yep, the target might not be there any longer, but that's not the problem - the missile should still be flying towards search coordinates, not into orbit.

[Hoarfrost]

4 часа назад, Chizh сказал:

Если и изменится то в гомеопатической дозе.

 

Пока нет, но есть в плане.

Посмотрим конечно, но к.м.к 120-ой очень хорошо помогло, энергию она значительно лучше сохранять стала, даже без учета лофта, или у нее аэродинамика самой конструкции лучше? 

[FoxAlfa]

38 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

No, they didn't. 120s are underperforming in a bunch of ways, and you know this.

 

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

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.

 

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.

 

That is my opinion take it or leave it. With that said MADDOG got fixed and 120 is still being worked on and for sure it is improving, and I am really looking forward to seeing how it performs when it is finished. 
 

38 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

Similarly, all the limitations you mentioned should apply to all platforms, so the fact that you're stuck on 120s here while going around saying everything should be the same standards when it benefits R-27s (specifically in this case WRT CFDs and new FM ) is at least somewhat peculiar.

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. 

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[Кош]

20 минут назад, GGTharos сказал:

 

You are being unnecessarily pedantic.  Yep, there's a big difference and these things you can read about and speculate about their exact meaning.  No one here is going to know the exact differences, and if they do they won't be talking about them - and you know this.   The simplest level of simulation in DCS here is simply the chaff rejection value for all of this.

 

And yes, INU is not magical but your response isn't reasonable either.   INU should steer the missile where it needs to go, not leave it flying into space.  Yep, the target might not be there any longer, but that's not the problem - the missile should still be flying towards search coordinates, not into orbit.

Being unnecessarily pedantic is what I do for a living, so sorry for that. Still my intention is not toxicity but greater good of the community.

From my experience, advocating anything at the scale people present here are doing from both sides requires at least an "educated guesswork" and not "this is digital so better". I've seen my share of shit-tech originating from companies considered leaders in the market so "this is new" does not tell a thing.

So far I saw good constructive position towards R-27 tracking math with real docs provided.

120 on the contrary sometimes acts as a cheat-insta-tracker and cheat-turner and I'm eager to see links to docs approving this.

INU should steer the missile to the target approximation on the moment of track loss, not being an aimbot also. Thank you.

 

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 Кош

[dundun92]

7 minutes ago, FoxAlfa said:

60% of a PK

60% Pk from what? 60% Pk because of target manuevering? 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

 

10 minutes ago, FoxAlfa said:

All pilots talks and Air forces I seen train to support it till impact

Because it increases Pk vs chaff/ECM/notching, etc. It doesnt imply that seeing targets at 8nm is OP/unrealistic.

 

And to be clear, im not doubting the AMRAAM seeker is overperforming in many ways, specifically vs cold aspect/low RCS targets. But I havent seen any specific evidence that seeing hot aspect fighters at 8nm is somehow OP or unrealistic.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

13 minutes ago, Кош said:

Dollars, so 120 has a pure INS stage like R-24??? Thought it's always supported until active.

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.

Edited March 23, 2021 by TaxDollarsAtWork