Missile Dynamics - A discussion

[L0op8ack]

Possibly set it to ignore enemies and give it complex closely spaces waypoints?

 

Either way, I think the best way to look at this would be MP stats. That's basically "real world" testing in this case.

 

Agree.

My suggestion:

Providing ON_FIRE event callback(like on_kill_player/on_damage), it would help digging out how many missiles are fired and how many of them hit something.

[Pyroflash]

How many times have you ALREADY been told, in this thread and in others, that missiles are still being tuned and there are several known issues with them?

 

 

 

ED testers have already, multiple times, said that this is known because missile AFM is still being tuned. Everyone already knows, for example, that the ER isn't right. You have been told this long before you started your little exercise, so what are you looking to prove here? That we were right when we told you "yup, missiles are still being tuned"?

 

Please read when people talk to you. If you're trying to say "missiles don't work right in FC3 beta right now", then yes - we know. We've said so many many times.

 

Some quick pickups:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1637299&postcount=792

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1648570&postcount=63

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1648681&postcount=74

 

I believe that he is trying to prove that the AIM-120C is overpowered when compared to any other missile. I don't know how he is going to go about accomplishing this, but I think this is what he is trying to suggest.

 

Though honestly from experience, I really don't see the AIM-120C as some kind of unbeatable missile unless you just don't know what you are doing. If anything the AIM-120C should be more powerful, however I am not going to argue this as I have no compounding evidence to support my opinion.

[danilop]

Exactly, Pyro :thumbup:, thanks

 

All missiles are bad at the moment, but AIM-120c is better than it should be (relatively speaking, not absolutely). All this whining is meant to improve modeling in final version.

 

In this statistically and logically challenged example of mine I was trying to point out the fact that I saw PK of over 35% for AIM-120c and three times less PK for R-77.

 

It should be less of a difference.

 

If you're trying to say "missiles don't work right in FC3 beta right now", then yes - we know. We've said so many many times.

 

BINGO!

 

You should have warned me that discussion about the subject is not allowed after official acknowledgment of FC3 beta problems. After all, this is a commercial forum and you represent the ED. If so, I apologize for string the pot.

 

Feel free to delete any inappropriate post which I've made.

 

:pilotfly:

Edited January 11, 2013 by danilop

[Exorcet]

That would be true if sides had virtual pilots of exactly the same abilities which was never the case.

 

But it approaches this as the size of the player pool increases. Basically skill will even out if we look across multiple servers.

 

If all else fails, let's get the 104th to declare war on the 51.

 

In reality, that would be tuning and equalizing for multiplayer

I suggested what I did for collecting data, not for tweaking. The tweaking should be left to devs who are using real world data.

 

BTW, the side which dispute modelling of the missiles ATM, is accused of wanting just that! Irony, or what? :)

I think both sides are disputing AFM missiles at the moment. AMRAAM loft is super gimped. All the missile behave strangely.

[Pyroflash]

But it approaches this as the size of the player pool increases. Basically skill will even out if we look across multiple servers.

 

If all else fails, let's get the 104th to declare war on the 51.

 

 

I suggested what I did for collecting data, not for tweaking. The tweaking should be left to devs who are using real world data.

 

 

I think both sides are disputing AFM missiles at the moment. AMRAAM loft is super gimped. All the missile behave strangely.

 

Okay, I am going to set up a run of standardized tests that multiple people can perform and try to replicate results. That way the community can get involved in getting raw data, and not just opinionated arguments. I'll make a thread in a few minutes to facilitate this, if anyone wants to join in to help, please do. However if you do decide to help, you must understand that it is going to be an honor system on accepting your results, and that I will be expecting you to both know exactly what you are doing, and to also fly in parameters for the tests.

 

Edit: Thread up here http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1648808#post1648808

Edited January 11, 2013 by Pyroflash

[Angel101]

All missiles are bad at the moment...

 

I Agree.

 

 

 

...but AIM-120c is better than it should be (relatively speaking, not absolutely)

 

 

I disagree, AIM-120C should be better and also R77.

 

 

All this whining is meant to improve modeling in final version.

 

 

 

Where do you want to reach to be happy??

 

120c=75%PK R77=75%PK?

120c=75%PK R77=50%PK?

120c=75%PK R77=25%PK?

[pepin1234]

I Agree.

 

 

 

 

I disagree, AIM-120C should be better and also R77.

 

 

 

Where do you want to reach to be happy??

 

120c=75%PK R77=75%PK?

120c=75%PK R77=50%PK?

120c=75%PK R77=25%PK?

 

 

Do you have something else you agree or disagree?? just to know.

 

The only new negative feature have the new AIM-120 is he lose speed when maneuvering, even the AIM-7M in this 1.2.2 version is better than the R-27R. Really disappointing, when the R-27R have better performance and superior speed.

 

The only thing should do the F-15 against a RU missile is dispence 3 or 4 times chaffs and solved the problem. unbelievable!! does not matter the altitud to launch the R-27, he lose the track and speed easyly.

 

The R-27R and ER have a special aerodynamic design to support the heavy weigh missile and also have bigs wings to performs the real capability of the missile.

 

I am curious and waiting the next patch...

Edited January 20, 2013 by pepin1234

[GGTharos]

The only new negative feature have the new AIM-120 is he lose speed when maneuvering, even the AIM-7M in this 1.2.2 version is better than the R-27R. Really disappointing, when the R-27R have better performance and superior speed.

 

The AIM-7 is electronically superior to the R-27R, and it has greater range. You are correct, though, the R-27R has higher peak speed.

 

The only thing should do the F-15 against a RU missile is dispence 3 or 4 times chaffs and solved the problem. unbelievable!! does not matter the altitud to launch the R-27, he lose the track and speed easyly.

 

This is a separate problem and I already put in a bug for this, though F-15 ECM should already make use of R-27R poor.

 

The R-27R and ER have a special aerodynamic design to support the heavy weigh missile and also have bigs wings to performs the real capability of the missile.

 

Those missiles are no more special than any other missiles. The are designed to perform a function. So are other missiles.

[pepin1234]

The AIM-7 is electronically superior to the R-27R, and it has greater range. You are correct, though, the R-27R has higher peak speed..

 

No, you are not right. The AIM-7 is a missile with a bad background. The R-27R is a missile made to be superior. The only argument you can take to say that is the the russian electronic is "simple" but thats not mean they are inferior. Some time is the contrary. The history can say much about that and also the present with the overview of the F-22 and F-35.

 

 

 

This is a separate problem and I already put in a bug for this, though F-15 ECM should already make use of R-27R poor

 

Good job from your part. Also could you notify please that the Su-27/33 have two greats ECM pods, good enough to weaken your "superior" Aim-7

 

 

 

Those missiles are no more special than any other missiles. The are designed to perform a function. So are other missiles.

 

Here is your mistake, specialy when you are a moderator here and we are the customers saying our opinions with complet right. Obiosly you misunderstand me and I am not glorifying military hardware of my side using the same affirmation of you: " is electronically superior ".

 

I just like clarify that the missile has sufficient aerodynamic design to support the performance should have and we do not see it in our game, with simulator level category.

[MaverickF22]

Those missiles are no more special than any other missiles.

You're right..., but there is one specialty of the house that virtually can't be stopped by anything. when it locks something up! And that's the AIM-120C/B...! Nonetheless that everyone around has noticed it's unbeatable energy peak and range..., it's also impossible to get rid off...once it locked you up, you can try yanking and banking all around with or without beaming(putting it on a 9 or 3 o clock position) and chaffing like crazy..., this baby won't let you down until you are down.

 

The are designed to perform a function.

"The" as you've said, has a remarkable function of following targets way below any other Surface to Air/Air to Air missile could ever do..., in terms that it could maintain lock and kill any flyable object even if the object flies at merely 0.5-1 meters above the ground or sea...! I've tested this..., and you couldn't break it's lock nomatter how low you would go or whatever else you'd do and no missile in reality could do that..., normally this missile can't follow a target which has more tan 8 G's due to breaking lock on that target and i have this information from a military document if you don't trust... This missile really is the king of the kings since FC3 came up!

 

You should know what the real relates tell about the AIM-120's performances, from the countries that have tried them or from US where they're built and tested! Well, the Pk stays somewhere around 50%:P, not more! "Janes IDR Dec 2008 issue which reported that AIM120's combat record is far from sterling. Nine kills out of a total of 17 fired in real combat - only 53 % kill." Not to mention that nowadays they've found a big problem with the rocket motor at low temperature conditions (where they should operate when fired from high altitudes) where the propellant changes it's chemical state and won't fire..., but that's another story!

 

So are other missiles.

It seems like it isn't the case here!

Do you say that DCS/FC goes for realism and respects real world performances and data? I personally doubt, and it feels more that all of these weird performances for various missiles or aircrafts (Ex: Su-27's insane roll rates and very low rolling inertia) are intentionally meant to be like this by the devs, more like for propaganda or for whatever reason idk..., because they know too that it is not the way it should be. And let's say things aren't yet settled down and the AFM for missiles is only at the beginning..., and there's an old saying that: "the good things always need their time". But i start doubting that some things will ever change...!

Edited January 22, 2013 by MaverickF22

[Cali]

No, you are not right. The AIM-7 is a missile with a bad background. The R-27R is a missile made to be superior.

 

The older AIM-7's had a lot of problems, the newer ones are good.

[Krebs20]

The trick to defeat an AIM 120 is to defeat it on the first 10 seconds of its launch. If you are seeing a active missile warning, you messed up and are going to have a hard time avoiding it. The AIM 120 and R77 are only a threat I'd you let them become one. When the missiles active, you have to fool the missile and the launching platforms radar. I would rather try to fool the launching platform with a quick notch and chaff before the missile is active.

[wilky510]

No, you are not right. The AIM-7 is a missile with a bad background. The R-27R is a missile made to be superior.

The R-27 has a 'bad' background if you wanna include any kind of history. Atleast the R-73 stepped up and has proven itself a great missile.

 

 

The history can say much about that and also the present with the overview of the F-22 and F-35.

Don't even start with this crap in a missile discussion thread.

 

 

 

 

You should know what the real relates tell about the AIM-120's performances, from the countries that have tried them or from US where they're built and tested! Well, the Pk stays somewhere around 50%, not more! "Janes IDR Dec 2008 issue which reported that AIM120's combat record is far from sterling. Nine kills out of a total of 17 fired in real combat - only 53 % kill." Not to mention that nowadays they've found a big problem with the rocket motor at low temperature conditions (where they should operate when fired from high altitudes) where the propellant changes it's chemical state and won't fire..., but that's another story!

I'm sure the Russian missiles all have such better combat records... right?

[Dudikoff]

The R-27 has a 'bad' background if you wanna include any kind of history. At least the R-73 stepped up and has proven itself a great missile.

 

Do you have any substantial records regarding this history? I suppose you're referring to the Ethiopia-Eritrea clashes. Without knowing the exact circumstances and the condition of those missiles, I don't think it's worth much.

 

I'm sure the Russians would have figured out during the last 25+ years if these missiles didn't work as advertised and would have pulled them from service or introduce modernized variants by now.. At least you would have leaked reports or testimonies from the Soviet era (or ex-Warsaw pact countries) regarding this..

[wilky510]

Without knowing the exact circumstances and the condition of those missiles, I don't think it's worth much.

Exactly. People sit here and talk about AMRAAM PK in other wars when they don't know the exact circumstances.

[GGTharos]

No, you are not right. The AIM-7 is a missile with a bad background. The R-27R is a missile made to be superior. The only argument you can take to say that is the the russian electronic is "simple" but thats not mean they are inferior. Some time is the contrary. The history can say much about that and also the present with the overview of the F-22 and F-35.

 

Yes, I am right. AIM-7M is 1982 version, 1987 version (MH variant) received major software upgrades, and conversion to AIM-7P with new hardware was commenced in 1987 as well. It was already a superior missile to R-27R.

 

Good job from your part. Also could you notify please that the Su-27/33 have two greats ECM pods, good enough to weaken your "superior" Aim-7

 

Only one of four aircraft in the flight would carry ECM pods.

 

Here is your mistake, specialy when you are a moderator here and we are the customers saying our opinions with complet right. Obiosly you misunderstand me and I am not glorifying military hardware of my side using the same affirmation of you: " is electronically superior ".

 

Here's your mistake: Claiming to be unbiased when you obviously are biased.

 

I just like clarify that the missile has sufficient aerodynamic design to support the performance should have and we do not see it in our game, with simulator level category.

 

Really? Do you have data for aerodynamic performance of R-27R?

[karambiatos]

The trick to defeat an AIM 120 is to defeat it on the first 10 seconds of its launch. If you are seeing a active missile warning, you messed up and are going to have a hard time avoiding it. The AIM 120 and R77 are only a threat I'd you let them become one. When the missiles active, you have to fool the missile and the launching platforms radar. I would rather try to fool the launching platform with a quick notch and chaff before the missile is active.

 

id like to see how defeating is done when youre within its maneuvering air target range, with that tactic, or any other to be honest (tactic that is).

[Wolf One]

Unfortunately, sometimes simply being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian can have unwanted consequences. Sometimes the crowd is actually telling you something.

[MaverickF22]

Here are some interesting things to know about various missiles and their limitations!

 

I'm not part of the military to know more about the accuracy of the data found here, but the information doesn't seem too far from real..., have a look:

 

http://www.quebecairforce.com/falcon/escadrilles/canada8/WolfPack/Training/TacRef/Tacticals.pdf

[MaverickF22]

Sometimes the crowd is actually telling you something.

Good point mate..., yet someone or the devs don't care about whatever the crowd would say, just because they only "trust" what they call certain documentation, but sometimes they won't trust even the data found in manuals, not to talk about what others say..., they only believe what they want and treat us like we'd know nothing, so you might accidentally be just a simple player of a "game", not a sim...!

[MaverickF22]

I'm sure the Russian missiles all have such better combat records... right?

 

Perhaps too..., but one in particular is beating all records here, the LAME 120, or by definition, Amraam stands for -Another Mistake Regarding Air to Air Missiles-..., just to make a small joke about it:P!

[Exorcet]

You're right..., but there is one specialty of the house that virtually can't be stopped by anything. when it locks something up! And that's the AIM-120C/B...! Nonetheless that everyone around has noticed it's unbeatable energy peak and range..., it's also impossible to get rid off...once it locked you up, you can try yanking and banking all around with or without beaming(putting it on a 9 or 3 o clock position) and chaffing like crazy..., this baby won't let you down until you are down.

The last time I flew a Su-27 online, I went head to head with an Eagle, dodged two BVR AIM-120's and flew into visual range before I was shot down with a AIM-7.

 

The 120 is certainly not unstoppable.

[Dudikoff]

I'm not part of the military to know more about the accuracy of the data found here, but the information doesn't seem too far from real..., have a look:

 

http://www.quebecairforce.com/falcon/escadrilles/canada8/WolfPack/Training/TacRef/Tacticals.pdf

 

The R-27 variant data is totally messed up and kinda discredits the document. It seems to be some rough reference guide for the Falcon 4.0. Were these errors present in the original game or it's just a messed up reference?

[GGTharos]

Yeah, interesting. But see, Falcon 4 data isn't RL data, so it doesn't get used.

 

Here are some interesting things to know about various missiles and their limitations!

 

I'm not part of the military to know more about the accuracy of the data found here, but the information doesn't seem too far from real..., have a look:

 

http://www.quebecairforce.com/falcon/escadrilles/canada8/WolfPack/Training/TacRef/Tacticals.pdf

[GGTharos]

Good point mate..., yet someone or the devs don't care about whatever the crowd would say,

 

What does the crowd know that they don't?

 

just because they only "trust" what they call certain documentation,

 

Which is far better than anything you have.

 

but sometimes they won't trust even the data found in manuals, not to talk about what others say..., they only believe what they want and treat us like we'd know nothing, so you might accidentally be just a simple player of a "game", not a sim...!

 

... when you present an F4 manual as truth, you pretty much peg yourself as knowing nothing.