Missile Dynamics - A discussion

[Teknetinium]

There is not reason for this to not be correct, actually - it is a reasonable ballpark. You can't expect ED to acquire exact motor burn times for everything, they just do the best they can. The R-27ER is undoubtedly the draggier missile with the bigger rocket. It does not implement energy preserving measures on the level than the AIM-120 does, which is why the 120 performs better. Newer missile, newer techniques, newer and constantly updated rocket motor - it's just a newer, better thing.

 

The encyclopedia in-game is out of sync with updates that go into the game unfortunately; and generally speaking missile ranges are adjusted based on the most credible source of info that can be found plus educated guesses where needed.

 

That is your assumptions that half of this community don't agree whit, your educated guesses are bias.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

I don't care. This won't be the first or last time that you, or the community is wrong. Present a technical manual or other credible info that proves what you're talking about and ED will consider it.

 

That is your assumptions that half of this community don't agree whit.

[Teknetinium]

I don't care. This won't be the first or last time that you, or the community is wrong. Present a technical manual or other credible info that proves what you're talking about and ED will consider it.

 

Are you trying to say that the missiles are modeled correctly now? you should think about how you talk to thouse who suport ED :) It seems that you still dont get the point that FC and DCS products do have other aircrafts that need attention rathere then your beloved aim-120C.

 

GG I was one of them who made educated gussies that missiles were way to good in FC1 and FC2, I suggested as well systems, as working TWS and EOS (inertial guidance for missiles to compensate missiles dynamics) F-15 dose it whit working TWS. But you still refuse to understand what is said in the Su-27 manual.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Teknetinium

[sorcer3r]

One thing I'd comment on this - I've tested, and the AIM120C and R27ER hase EXACTLY the same time of burn-out of their fuel (what a coincidence... I doubt IRL thats correct), and this is 10 seconds.

 

Someone translated a part of a Mig-29 manual in bms forums:

 

The R-27E is equipped with dual-mode solid engine weighing 192.5 kg thrust increase (up to 7500 kg), running for 11 seconds.

If thats true 10 seconds would be almost correct. (for R27E)

[GGTharos]

Actually the running time is variable ... a real rocket will run with different thrust and for longer/shorter depending on external pressure, so exact rocket operation will change based on altitude.

[GGTharos]

It seems that you're not getting the point that blah blah does not equate to missile performance. Credible documents do :)

 

Are you trying to say that the missiles are modeled correctly now? you should think about how you talk to thouse who suport ED :) It seems that you still dont get the point that FC and DCS products do have other aircrafts that need attention rathere then your beloved aim-120C.

 

We already knew this before you did, but it's only within a very specific context, which you still fail to understand. The F-15 isn't complensating for anything, and isn't doing anything particularly better than the Su-27 in this game.

 

And I've read the Su-27 manual ... there's no TWS operation of the missiles, period, end of story. The missiles must sense the guidance signal from the radar before launch, tune to it, as well as perform other functions. That fire control system will generate the guidance signal when you fire. If there are exceptions to that, they're not in the manuals available to us (aside from emergency operations).

 

GG I was one of them who made educated gussies that missiles were way to good in FC1 and FC2, I suggested as well systems, as working TWS and EOS (inertial guidance for missiles to compensate missiles dynamics) F-15 dose it whit working TWS. But you still refuse to understand what is said in the Su-27 manual.

[Teknetinium]

It seems that you're not getting the point that blah blah does not equate to missile performance. Credible documents do :)

 

 

 

We already knew this before you did, but it's only within a very specific context, which you still fail to understand. The F-15 isn't complensating for anything, and isn't doing anything particularly better than the Su-27 in this game.

 

And I've read the Su-27 manual ... there's no TWS operation of the missiles, period, end of story. The missiles must sense the guidance signal from the radar before launch, tune to it, as well as perform other functions. That fire control system will generate the guidance signal when you fire. If there are exceptions to that, they're not in the manuals available to us (aside from emergency operations).

 

 

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/527/

READ!!!

[FLANKERATOR]

My experience On line in FC3 is that the AIM120C consistently out ranges the R27ER in head to head engagements. Is this in line with the Devs intentions ? I have always thought that the R27ER was the missile with the longer legs ?

 

The Ingame Encyclopaedia quotes ( I know these are not Dynamic values) range of 70Km/Mach 3 for the R27ER and 55Km/Mach 4 for both Aim120B/C.

 

In game Fire Zone comparisons (Using TWS values for Mig29 as STT values are bugged) provide the following values:

 

Situation Head on Co Speed 0.9M/7000m

 

R77

Rmax1 42Km Rmax2 15Km

 

R27ER

Rmax1 48Km Rmax2 20Km

 

AIM120C

Rmax1 55km (30nm) Rmax2 18Km (10nm)

 

Hi Ivank,

 

Have you monitored speed as well by any chance ? like top speed, time to top speed, and speed at different checkpoints to the target ?

 

I've made couple of quick sorties and had the impression that although the Amraam hits a higher top Mach number, it slows down faster in comparison to the R-27ER.

[GGTharos]

Are you referring to this part:

The missiles pursue their targets in accordance with an update proportional navigation method both in the inertial/radio-corrected flight trajectory phase and in the semi-active homing phase after locking on target en route.

 

Because if you are, then you're once more showing that you like to make up fantasies from things you do not understand. It is normal for a SARH missile to use INS with MCU's until its seeker can acquire its target. AIM-7 does the same thing.

 

This says zippity-squat about TWS (actually, SNP mode) operation, which if you actually read the flanker operating manual you would have known that it is not used for weapon employment.

 

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/527/

READ!!!

[pepin1234]

There is not reason for this to not be correct, actually - it is a reasonable ballpark. You can't expect ED to acquire exact motor burn times for everything, they just do the best they can. The R-27ER is undoubtedly the draggier missile with the bigger rocket. It does not implement energy preserving measures on the level than the AIM-120 does, which is why the 120 performs better. Newer missile, newer techniques, newer and constantly updated rocket motor - it's just a newer, better thing.

 

The encyclopedia in-game is out of sync with updates that go into the game unfortunately; and generally speaking missile ranges are adjusted based on the most credible source of info that can be found plus educated guesses where needed.

 

Sorry but I have to say that all your opinions seem rarely and I dont agree at all with you. The R-27ER have more fuel and say me when was the last time you were in a official testing with the russian engineers to affirm here the 120C have better performance than the R-27ER Yes or Yes. You are talking easyly about how modern and capable is the engine of a missile. At every of yours posts all the community can see what is your goal.

[Teknetinium]

Are you referring to this part:

 

Because if you are, then you're once more showing that you like to make up fantasies from things you do not understand. It is normal for a SARH missile to use INS with MCU's until its seeker can acquire its target. AIM-7 does the same thing.

 

This says zippity-squat about TWS (actually, SNP mode) operation, which if you actually read the flanker operating manual you would have known that it is not used for weapon employment.

 

 

Why dont we have it then? This is emmited whit F-15s TWS in FC3 so the missile dont give away warning. If the missile is guided by INS with MCUs the missile should not bleed as much speed since it is not maneuvering after the target. This is not the case in FC, still you claim everything is fine, so there could be some work around to compensate for that feature, GG this is FC3 not DCS aircrafts ;).

 

And GG if you know so much, what feature dose Su-27 TWS have? Rather then what we have in FC where I get visual presentation on MFD?:)

Edited December 3, 2012 by Teknetinium

[Kuky]

GG Can you please present some hard core documentation that R-27 missiles do not have INS guidance?

 

I have seens in few documentaries and some Australian Defence regional threats documents where they compare various US and Russian missiles and there is always mention that R-27 family of missiles in fact do have INS guidance, and if this is the case then there should be no misisle launch warning in RWR when R-27 is fired, the only warning you should get is when the missile switches from INS to SARH guidance.

 

Yes, you need to keep an STT lock to fire the R-27 and not drop the lock, but the missile should launch in INS guidance first stage of flight to pre calculated point (same as 120's and 77's) the only difference between them is 120 and 77 should have capability of launch in TWS mode (no STT lock and no RWR lock warning) and they should all guide in INS guidance first untill in terminal phase where 120 and 77 switch to their own radar while R-27 needs to be guided by launching aircraft radar.

[sorcer3r]

Why dont we have it then? This is emmited whit F-15s TWS in FC3 so the missile dont give away warning. If the missile is guided by INS with MCUs the missile should not bleed as much speed since it is not maneuvering after the target. This is not the case in FC, still you claim everything is fine, so there could be some work around to compensate for that feature, GG this is FC3 not DCS aircrafts ;).

 

And GG if you know so much, what feature dose Su-27 TWS have? Rather then what we have in FC where I get visual presentation on MFD?:)

 

Maybe Chinese Su-27 / R-27 versions is what you need. It seems that their R-27s have active radar seekers. (Could be the reason why you get only a "pitbull warning" in falcon ;) )

[GGTharos]

GG Can you please present some hard core documentation that R-27 missiles do not have INS guidance?

 

No, I cannot, because that is not what I said. The R-27 radar guided missiles DO have INS, it's just not used the way you think it is. THere's no magical TWS-to-STT with missile in flight mode. THe missile uses the INS to guide itself to a point where the seeker can pick up the target due to the seeker's lower sensitivity.

 

All of this is done with the radar in attack mode from the moment you pull the trigger, in STT.

 

and if this is the case then there should be no misisle launch warning in RWR when R-27 is fired, the only warning you should get is when the missile switches from INS to SARH guidance.

Wrong. That is your assumption, and not how things actually work. The radar will transfer to guidance waveform right away. The F-15 radar does the same thing for the sparrow with pretty good reasons (the seeker needs this waveform, and and has to be tuned to it at launch).

 

Yes, you need to keep an STT lock to fire the R-27 and not drop the lock, but the missile should launch in INS guidance first stage of flight to pre calculated point (same as 120's and 77's) the only difference between them is 120 and 77 should have capability of launch in TWS mode (no STT lock and no RWR lock warning) and they should all guide in INS guidance first untill in terminal phase where 120 and 77 switch to their own radar while R-27 needs to be guided by launching aircraft radar.

All these missiles do the following things the same way:

 

1) Receive M-Link from carrier

2) Update target positions from M-link

3) Calculate new intercept/seeker active point from update

4) Fly to this new position using whatever algo they use (PN in case of the 27, something smarter in case of 120 and probably 77)

5) Reach this point and activate seeker

6) Acquire target (we hope)

7) Go terminal guidance.

 

Here's what they do different:

 

1) AIM-7/R-27 must tune to the radar freq/channel at launch.

2) They must receive the carrier wave on their datalink antennae.

3) They require a specific waveform for attacking the target which must be tuned at launch.

 

AIM-120/R-77 have no need for such things, they just need an M-Link channel that is separate from other missiles. If you launch them with STT though the should still attempt to transfer to the more accurate attack waveform right away, and thus you will get the warning right away as well.

 

Once you get into much newer radars this may no longer be an issue, but as far as the Su-27 and F-15 radar that we do have modeled in-game go, that is the way they do things.

[GGTharos]

That would be because falcon is full of its own kind of BS. The Chinese have better weapons to use than the R-27.

 

Maybe Chinese Su-27 / R-27 versions is what you need. It seems that their R-27s have active radar seekers. (Could be the reason why you get only a "pitbull warning" in falcon ;) )

[GGTharos]

Why don't we have what? AIM-7 launch produces a warning which is exactly as it should be, and in accordance with what I said.

 

The missile will bleed as much speed as it will in any turn that it makes when it is guiding; if you are referring to update frequency, STT will give you a very high update frequency so you might not see much of a difference between the missile using its own seeker and MCUs. Quit making stuff up.

 

Why dont we have it then? This is emmited whit F-15s TWS in FC3 so the missile dont give away warning. If the missile is guided by INS with MCUs the missile should not bleed as much speed since it is not maneuvering after the target. This is not the case in FC, still you claim everything is fine, so there could be some work around to compensate for that feature, GG this is FC3 not DCS aircrafts ;).

 

Why don't you go read up on it?

 

And GG if you know so much, what feature dose Su-27 TWS have? Rather then what we have in FC where I get visual presentation on MFD?:)

[sorcer3r]

That would be because falcon is full of its own kind of BS. The Chinese have better weapons to use than the R-27.

 

But they seem to have active radar R-27 and for sure R-77 (also in falcon).

[G-Lock91]

No, I cannot, because that is not what I said. The R-27 radar guided missiles DO have INS

 

Many missiles, including the R-27 radar guided family lack INS.

 

Took ^ from the Western bias page that is now closed.. Couldn't grab the quote so I had to copy/paste... but you're confusing the shit outta me.

[Kuky]

Yeah, in Falcon Su-27's fire the R-27's and it shows as AR missile on RWR which I think is wrong too.

 

But for FC3 we definitely need to model INS guidance for R-27 series, the R-77, AIM-7 and AIM-120 as they all have it.

 

The Range of missiles really needs adjusting also, the AIM-7, R-27 are pretty much on pair inMAX distance, then R-77 and AIM-120 have little longer range while the R-27E version should have way more range (from things I've seen comaring these, I'm guessing its about 40% longer range) as the R-27R, AIM-7, AIM-120 and R-77 are all medium range missiles while R-27ER is long range missile, and we don't have this in sim and I really think we should.

 

Now about the RWR warning... GG you could be right that launchin any one of these in STT mode should launch give warning on RWR but I am still reserved about it and would hope someone who knows and but is not allowed to say makes fake account here and just post it :D

 

The MiG-29S that does have 2 target engagement in TWS mode, really should work in same way as F-15C does in TWS mode and AIM-120 (silent launch and no lock warning while using TWS). Now just using common sense, I also don't see how a MiG-29 cuold have this capability and it's big brother Su-27, which is the main defender of the skies, would not? I know I don't have anything substantial to say it does or does not so again if someone finds something substantial we need it posted here.

[IvanK]

"Now about the RWR warning... GG you could be right that launchin any one of these in STT mode should launch give warning on RWR but I am still reserved about it and would hope someone who knows and but is not allowed to say makes fake account here and just post it"

 

"Trust me" Kuky you WILL get RWR warning from AIM7 launch. Same I believe with R27R/ER. Guidance systems for both these missiles are very similar as are the pre launch (post trigger press) system/missile preparations prior to mechanical launch.

 

As to the INS business. INS in this regard (if indeed its fitted to the R27) would be just like a strap down platform providing inertial axis/stability type references to the missile not "INS navigation". It may also be used to provide acceleration G data for fuse arming post launch. I dont believe any Target coordinates are feed to the R27 before launch.... the INS is just used to tell the missile which way is up ... like a miniature Gyro ref system.

Edited December 3, 2012 by IvanK

[sorcer3r]

Yeah, in Falcon Su-27's fire the R-27's and it shows as AR missile on RWR which I think is wrong too.

 

Not if thats true:

"The R-27 missile is also license-produced in the PRC, though the production license was bought from Ukraine instead of Russia. The Chinese versions have a different active radar seeker taken from the Vympel R-77 missile, which was sold to the PRC by Russia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-27_%28air-to-air_missile%29

 

Maybe someone just needs to do a "chinese addon" :smartass:

[Teknetinium]

I realy hope ED do something about Russian TWS, because in FC2 and FC3 it dosent do anything!!!!

[159th_Viper]

I realy hope ED do something about Russian TWS, because in FC2 and FC3 it dosent do anything!!!!

 

Russian TWS? Here we go guessing again - I hate guessing. Please try and be clear and concise.

 

Are you referring to the SU-27? If so, the SU-27 is unable to launch R27-ER's in TWS mode. Having received feedback from the weapons-dev on this very issue as a result of the bug report I entered I provide you with his comment:

 

R-27R/ER missiles have a semiactive radio seeker. They can launch only STT mode, nothing else.

 

If you are placing this comment/issue in dispute then please provide me with substantive facts to the contrary.

 

 

Now about the RWR warning... GG you could be right that launchin any one of these in STT mode should launch give warning on RWR.....

 

On the contrary, common sense dictates that the launch warning we get at present should already be gotten the moment STT mode is entered. How can the opposing RWR distinguish between STT and subsequent launch?

[Cali]

GG Can you please present some hard core documentation that R-27 missiles do not have INS guidance?

 

I have seens in few documentaries and some Australian Defence regional threats documents where they compare various US and Russian missiles and there is always mention that R-27 family of missiles in fact do have INS guidance, and if this is the case then there should be no misisle launch warning in RWR when R-27 is fired, the only warning you should get is when the missile switches from INS to SARH guidance.

 

Yes, you need to keep an STT lock to fire the R-27 and not drop the lock, but the missile should launch in INS guidance first stage of flight to pre calculated point (same as 120's and 77's) the only difference between them is 120 and 77 should have capability of launch in TWS mode (no STT lock and no RWR lock warning) and they should all guide in INS guidance first untill in terminal phase where 120 and 77 switch to their own radar while R-27 needs to be guided by launching aircraft radar.

 

So what you are saying is that basically the 27ER is like a 120 fired in TWS but have to hold lock the whole time? If that's the case then that doesn't seem right. You have to lock the bandit in STT, which gives the guy a warning. Maybe it's too early in the morning here, but some of this stuff seems like crap. Oh great, someone found some info on the net......that's always a creditable source. I'm sure I can find something about 120's being tested to have a range of 70 miles. Man, you people have to understand that we aren't going to know how this stuff works in real situations, things can and do go wrong all the time. Also, at times things seem to work better then advertised. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for realism. Show Ed, like GG said some hardcore proof like manuals or tech data and he said they will look at it. Showing pages from the internet......:megalol: come on really!

[GGTharos]

Yeah, in Falcon Su-27's fire the R-27's and it shows as AR missile on RWR which I think is wrong too.

 

But for FC3 we definitely need to model INS guidance for R-27 series, the R-77, AIM-7 and AIM-120 as they all have it.

 

The Range of missiles really needs adjusting also, the AIM-7, R-27 are pretty much on pair inMAX distance, then R-77 and AIM-120 have little longer range while the R-27E version should have way more range (from things I've seen comaring these, I'm guessing its about 40% longer range) as the R-27R, AIM-7, AIM-120 and R-77 are all medium range missiles while R-27ER is long range missile, and we don't have this in sim and I really think we should.

 

As you already know though, missile adjustments are perma-WIP.

 

Now about the RWR warning... GG you could be right that launchin any one of these in STT mode should launch give warning on RWR but I am still reserved about it and would hope someone who knows and but is not allowed to say makes fake account here and just post it :D

 

See IvanK's post. And really, there's plenty of data to say you'll be getting the warning, for one reason or another. It's sort of all over the place but it's findable.

 

The MiG-29S that does have 2 target engagement in TWS mode, really should work in same way as F-15C does in TWS mode and AIM-120 (silent launch and no lock warning while using TWS). Now just using common sense, I also don't see how a MiG-29 cuold have this capability and it's big brother Su-27, which is the main defender of the skies, would not? I know I don't have anything substantial to say it does or does not so again if someone finds something substantial we need it posted here.

 

Yes the MiG-29S 2TWS should work like the F-15's with the R-77. This was a very specific radar upgrade to a few very specific models of MiG.