Ракеты в DCS

[Breakshot]

No. Supporting 120s does increase PK, there are post active DL updates. All relevant manuals (F-16 -34 to name 1) support this

Bingo. End of argument.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[FoxAlfa]

 

3 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

Yes it'll result in a higher PK but the missiles even without out datalink updates the missile is still going to be extremely resistant to both countermeasures and notching.  Datalink updates are just the icing ontop for the rare circumstances where something weird happens or there are friendlies mixed in with hostiles.

 People overestimate what a 5in antenna and 30mhz battery powered processor can do... it needs all the help it can get...

[Breakshot]

Yes it'll result in a higher PK but the missiles even without out datalink updates the missile is still going to be extremely resistant to both countermeasures and notching.  Datalink updates are just the icing ontop for the rare circumstances where something weird happens or there are friendlies mixed in with hostiles.

No. You got it backwards. The active seeker is the icing on the cake should support be lost. Not the other way around.

120 radar needs all the help it can get!

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[Jack1nthecrack]

1 minute ago, FoxAlfa said:

 

 People overestimate what a 5in antenna and 30mhz battery powered processor can do ... it needs all the help it can get ...

When will people realize a 5in antenna with a 30mhz battery will not be this insane ECM, chaff, and notch rejecting monster that they think it will be. If that was the case then the Gripen pilots in this video wouldn't support to impact while being targeted by the enemy missile as well. 

 

[nighthawk2174]

1 minute ago, Breakshot said:

No. You got it backwards. The active seeker is the icing on the cake should support be lost. Not the other way around.

120 radar needs all the help it can get!

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk
 

Ehh the performance the radar gets in range is already very impressive for its size and being a monopulse seeker with MPRF modes and modern digital electronics I think that my statement is more accurate.

[Breakshot]

Now lets get all missiles to the same guidance standards.

ECM = no loft, no variable PN.

Why is the SD10 and pheonix still not affected?

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[Hulkbust44]

Now lets get all missiles to the same guidance standards.

ECM = no loft, no variable PN.

Why is the SD10 and pheonix still not affected?

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

What, do you think every missile is built the same?

Mobius708

[GGTharos]

31 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

What missile are you talking about? Certainly doesn't work that way for an AIM-120C-5. Once pitbull the datalink connection is severed and the missile is on its own.

 

No, it isn't severed.  The missile stops 'listening' to it unless it loses track.  The Su-27/MiG-29 WCS discontinues the DL, yes, the AMRAAM platform does not.

[dundun92]

Just now, Hulkbust44 said:

What, do you think every missile is built the same?

Mobius708
 

How is any MRM supposed to loft without range information?

[GGTharos]

2 minutes ago, Breakshot said:

Now lets get all missiles to the same guidance standards.

ECM = no loft, no variable PN.

Why is the SD10 and pheonix still not affected?

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk
 

 

Great, and now at the same time let's make sure old ECM isn't quite so effective vs. newer platforms.  Or at minimum it can become 'otherwise engaged' by other platforms taking up its resources ... as well, missiles launched with good track data shouldn't care that that jamming has commenced, they already have range - that's for loft only, which will still cost in efficiency if the target changed course, but not as much.

[Hulkbust44]

 
No, it isn't severed.  The missile stops 'listening' to it unless it loses track.  The Su-27/MiG-29 WCS discontinues the DL, yes, the AMRAAM platform does not.

So in that case it is still not supported by the aircraft if it retains the initial target. They were saying that you could like overide the guidance to prevent a Mad-dog missile.

Mobius708

[nighthawk2174]

TBF I can imagine a loft without range information stuff like the javelin shows its possible.  I can't imagine you couldn't build something based off of LOS rates.  Would it be as good, probably not but it may still be possible.  Not to mention if host radar burns through it should go for a loft.

Edited July 22, 2021 by nighthawk2174

[Breakshot]

Ehh the performance the radar gets in range is already very impressive for its size and being a monopulse seeker with MPRF modes and modern digital electronics I think that my statement is more accurate.

Yes its accurate in current DCS implementation. Which of course suits the fanboys just fine.

Lets talk reality here. Or maybe you got some official manual data to prove your point (not!)

All RL pilot accounts and manuals/doctrines dispute your so called accurate theory.

I think I rather trust their data.

But nice try



Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[Hulkbust44]

Yes its accurate in current DCS implementation. Which of course suits the fanboys just fine.

Lets talk reality here. Or maybe you got some official manual data to prove your point (not!)

All RL pilot accounts and manuals/doctrines dispute your so called accurate theory.

I think I rather trust their data.

But nice try



Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

Wtf are you in about? You just contradicted yourself...

Mobius708

[Breakshot]

What, do you think every missile is built the same?

Mobius708

Once again you aren't understanding the query!

ECM prevents range information fed to the missile. No range info = no variable PN.

Questions?

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[GGTharos]

7 minutes ago, Breakshot said:

No. You got it backwards. The active seeker is the icing on the cake should support be lost. Not the other way around.

120 radar needs all the help it can get!

 

No, he has it right.  It is very clearly written in the manuals that we do have access to that once PITBULL, Pk is unaffected by continued support from the launching aircraft.  While there will be 'gotchas' in there, the statement is quite clear.  Pk is affected when launching beyond seeker range.

[FoxAlfa]

 

2 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

Ehh the performance the radar gets in range is already very impressive for its size and being a monopulse seeker with MPRF modes and modern digital electronics I think that my statement is more accurate.

 

The most of the radars MPRF according to research papers (academic and IEE) and manuals put the notch gates for F-16 ~55kts, F-15 and F-18 ~48knots... the lowest gate I heard is very close-range sub 5nm mode is ~25 knots... again, this for full power and cooling radars with 25+ times larger antennas... Aim-120 notch resistance and CM resistance comes from DL support since you have antennas at two angles.... not because Amraam does something completely different than any other radar...

[Breakshot]

TBF I can imagine a loft without range information stuff like the javelin shows its possible.  I can't imagine you couldn't build something based off of LOS rates.  Would it be as good, probably not but it may still be possible.  Not to mention if host radar burns through it should go for a loft.

I really hope ED doesn't make missiles based on imagination. Haha

You just shut down your own argument right there.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[GGTharos]

2 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

TBF I can imagine a loft without range information stuff like the javelin shows its possible.  I can't imagine you couldn't build something based off of LOS rates.  Would it be as good, probably not but it may still be possible.  Not to mention if host radar burns through it should go for a loft.

 

In fact LOS rates are a major part of a lot of loft algorithms.  Having range makes mid-course a lot more efficient.  Fun fact, with an all-digital missile like the 120, it could calculate distance based on its lofted flight.  It's not great because it's missing the complete vector information, but it can now consider how much 'oomph' to put in its turns.   I bet you could do similar with an analog missile, just not quite as easy.

3 minutes ago, FoxAlfa said:

Aim-120 notch resistance and CM resistance comes from DL support since you have antennas at two angles.... not because Amraam does something completely different than any other radar...

 

Again, no, it does not.  Clearly stated in the manual 'Pk is not affected by continued support from the launching aircraft once the missile is autonomous'.

[Breakshot]

 
No, he has it right.  It is very clearly written in the manuals that we do have access to that once PITBULL, Pk is unaffected by continued support from the launching aircraft.  While there will be 'gotchas' in there, the statement is quite clear.  Pk is affected when launching beyond seeker range.

Read my reply again and the subsequent ones from Alfa.

I think you didn't understand it.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[FoxAlfa]

4 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

 

No, he has it right.  It is very clearly written in the manuals that we do have access to that once PITBULL, Pk is unaffected by continued support from the launching aircraft.  While there will be 'gotchas' in there, the statement is quite clear.  Pk is affected when launching beyond seeker range.

Swedish air forces tactics say different.... also, from the papers I recall.... the support is dropped only in last few frames since that DL accuracy gets much lower than the seeker, so it would degrade the accuracy if DL input were included.  

Edited July 22, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[Hulkbust44]

I really hope ED doesn't make missiles based on imagination. Haha

You just shut down your own argument right there.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

Nothing you've said yet has made logical sense.

Mobius708

[GGTharos]

1 minute ago, FoxAlfa said:

Swedish air forces tactics say different.... also, from the papers I recall.... the support is dropped only in last few frames since that DL accuracy gets much lower than the seeker, so it would degrade the accuracy if DL input were included.  

 

Which tactics?  Where are they written?  Like I said, I have it in the manual, it's stated as such.   As I said, there are gotchas but an instruction like 'the Pk is not affected by continued support' isn't ambiguous in any way.

[nighthawk2174]

Just now, Breakshot said:

Yes its accurate in current DCS implementation. Which of course suits the fanboys just fine.

Lets talk reality here. Or maybe you got some official manual data to prove your point (not!)

All RL pilot accounts and manuals/doctrines dispute your so called accurate theory.

I think I rather trust their data.

But nice try



Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk
 

I'm sorry but I think your underestimating the seeker and as mentioned above the manuals indicate no difference in PK after pitbull rather a big difference while its still passive (which I completely agree with).  The datalink just allows while active too cover for possible rare events.

 

Just now, FoxAlfa said:

 

 

The most of the radars MPRF according to research papers (academic and IEE) and manuals put the notch gates for F-16 ~55kts, F-15 and F-18 ~48knots... the lowest gate I heard is very close-range sub 5nm mode is ~25 knots... again, this for full power and cooling radars with 25+ times larger antennas... Aim-120 notch resistance and CM resistance comes from DL support since you have antennas at two angles.... not because Amraam does something completely different than any other radar...

There are other anti-notch teqniques, from the F18's radar manual its possible to flip off the MLC and also to just track the target if its return is separated in range from the MLC or if the target return competes with the ground clutter to just track it even in the presence of clutter.  Not to me mention getting a notch on a missile is going to be extremely hard especially with the newer APN guidance algo.  Not to mention the missile should be able to reacquire if notched (I don't think it does in DCS now not sure though) and considering the range at which the seeker is active staying in the notch the entire time that requisition is going on is not an easy feat.

 

1 minute ago, Breakshot said:

I really hope ED doesn't make missiles based on imagination. Haha

You just shut down your own argument right there.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk
 

I'm sorry but what did I say that was false here?  LOS rates is absolutely a possible avenue to build a loft profile that doesn't require ranging information.  As can be seen there are missiles that loft without any range information in use.

[Breakshot]

 
Again, no, it does not.  Clearly stated in the manual 'Pk is not affected by continued support from the launching aircraft once the missile is autonomous'.

So for example an STT supported 120 that lost track on a target in the notch, while the support platform has a clear lock from a different angle should just miss and not reacquire the target. Is that what you mean?

Are you disputing the information that is clear in the F16 manual as referenced above by Dundun?



Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk