Missile Dynamics - A discussion

[Pilotasso]

This should prove the usefullness of the AMRAAMin WVR combat.

 

UrYcxXIg5fI

 

Note: it was the very first engagement with an AIM-120A.

 

Having said this, I was successfull in an ortogonal roll against an AIM-120C the first time I played FC3 and got shot at, but achieved numerous hits at similar ranges. Its not an end of them all missile by any means, but definatly usefull. We need a functional AIM-9 to avoid having to use 120's all the time.

[Sov13t]

Bring on AIM-9X! and helmet! MURICA!

[Pilotasso]

Why you say that? People hate 8 AMRAAM load and no I was not asking for the X, we dont need it. :)

[Sov13t]

From what I heard it was considered for FC3 release.

[159th_Viper]

From what I heard it was considered for FC3 release.

 

I must have missed that memo :megalol:

 

Have a wee word with your source - he needs to request a refund of whatever that info cost him :)

[Sov13t]

I must have missed that memo :megalol:

 

Have a wee word with your source - he needs to request a refund of whatever that info cost him :)

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1604411&postcount=301

 

;)

[sobek]

I think you misunderstood that.

[Teknetinium]

"No Iraqi aircraft carrying the SPS-141MVG pod was ever shot down by the Iranians, whether Ground defence system (HAWK Missiles) or Radar guided air to air (Sparrow and Phoenix Missiles) during the entire Iraq –Iran war.

This ECM pod works on both air and ground threats and it was externally mounted in pods in the SU-22 aircrafts. It was internally mounted in the Mig-23BN and Mig-25RBS. It was designed to affect the missiles homing head automatically once the enemy radar had locked and launched a missile against the aircraft carrying it. No special training was required for the pilots carrying the pod since it was a defensive one. The pilot has only to select the most probable threats in priority. This type of jammer was received by the Iraqis in 1984 from the Soviet Union along with the SU-22M3 aircraft batch. It was used successfully by the SU-22 belonging to the 69 squadron during the first highly successful raid on the Iranian Island of Kharg on the 15th of August 1985, when 6 aircrafts flew over the fortified island and attacked the oil terminals and got out unscathed. The I-Hawk battery in the island did nothing to the Iraqi aircraft neither did the F-4s and F-14s patrolling its skies.

The Iraqis received their first jamming pod of the SPS-141 type early in 1981.It was designed to counter HAWK MIM-23A, since this system dealt with head on targets only the SPS-141 had a frontal antenna only. That type was less capable than the SPS-141 MVG type, and was a little bit problematic in actual deployment. The SPS-141 MVG came with the SU-22 as a complete package and there was no begging by the Iraqis, but rather a forceful demand for such equipment. That system was designed to jam the MIM23B as well as F-14, F-15, F-16 radars in the lock-on mode. The pod will affect the homing heads of the AIM-7M, F Skyflash as well as the Phoenix missiles.

The Iranian HAWK operators had no way of countering the work of the pod since they were not aware of its operation. The ECM pod affects the missile homing head after it's launched. The ground operator could do nothing about that. The Iraqis used the pod successfully from 1984 to1988. This is compared with the useless and tragic way of the Iranian use of the AN/ALQ-109 and the AN/ALQ-119 American ECM pods which the Iraqis obtained in large quantities from the Iranians when they shot their aircrafts down since September 23 1988. There was a full warehouse full of these American pods in the Iraqi Air Force Headquarters in Baghdad. Many of these pods were in good condition, some were undamaged. This shows the bad attitude of the Iranians towards the philosophy of Electronic Warfare.

Again the KH-28, AS-9 was supplied in 1982and was used operationally in late 1982 against the Iranian Hawks with a devastating effect. The missile was usually launched from a range of 70km when the launching aircraft usually a SU-22 M2 was flying at an altitude of 7km and a speed of 750km/hr. To launch the missile to a range of 100km the aircraft has to fly at an altitude of 10km. This would make the aircraft handling a little bit sluggish, something not very popular with the pilots.

The KH- 28 homing head had a very good coverage in both in azimuth certainly much better that the American HARM/HTS pod which used the same philosophy of missile/pod arrangement. The Kh-28 had a high sensitivity receiver and it could detect the HAWK illuminator sidelobes at a range exceeding 200km. However the METEL pod which has the missile firing envelope programmed in it would prevent the pilot from launching of the missile, unless the aircraft is within the firing envelope of the anti radar missile itself.

The Iraqis implemented the soviet ECM doctrine with great success. Iran was left with 3-5 HAWK batteries out of 36 originally purchased by the Shah and despite the US/Israeli support both in missiles and ground equipments well as tactics during the Iran-contra affair. The Iraqis didn’t have to employ the mass soviet tactics since they were not confronting NATO forces. The soviet doctrine calls to the use of tactical nuclear weapons against the NATO HAWK batteries to open a gap in their coverage.

The Iranians started to use the mobility tactic upon the advice of the Israelis in 1986. However the Iraqis implemented a combined tactic of SEAD and conventional bombing to destroy the Iranian batteries.

I don’t know where the figure of 77 aircraft the Iraqi admitted to lose between February and March 1987 came from. This was part of the Iranian propaganda and was never said by the Iraqis. The contrary was correct. During one incident in February1987 a formation composed of four Iraqi SU-22s equipped with SPS-141 MVG were fired upon by 9 HAWK missiles from three different batteries in the south of Basra sector of the front. All 9 missiles missed their targets although the Iraqi aircrafts were flying at an altitude of 1000 meters only. The Iraqi aircraft which were carrying 6 FAB-500 bombs each bombed their target which was the Iranian infantry in that area and returned safely to base.

The KH-25MP is something entirely different from the KH-28. The principal of those missiles are entirely different. The KH-28 is an offensive weapon, while the Kh-25 is a totally defensive weapon aimed to protect the carrier aircraft.

The SPS-141 MVG was supplied by the Soviet Union and the East Germans had nothing to do with it, nor were East German experts ever utilised by the IrAF in the EW arena.

The SU-22 aircraft that tried to land near an airstrip near Dezful AB (the Iranians call it Vahdati AB) was not running out of fuel but its pilot was having some bad orientation and he figured that he was landing inside Iraq. The Iranian AAA near the strip shot him down and no aircraft or missile or pod was ever captured. The pilot ejected and returned to Iraq in 1990.

The Iraqi SEAD accompanied every attack on Iran in a continuous basis from 1984 and until August 1988. Every strike package was accompanied by SEAD elements according to the perceived Iranian threat and this led to minimise Iraqi losses to an unprecedented level. The Iraqi packages sometimes exceeded 80 fighter bombers simultaneously.

The Iranians had the MIM-23B advanced HAWK missile system, both the radar illuminator and the missiles since the seventies and so it was not new to them in 1987.

Till the end of the war Iranian AD operators never knew what hit them, whether it was KH-28or conventional bombs. They had some very good support from the Israelis and the Americans due to lack of their experience which resulted in loosing such a large amount of HAWK batteries and a very high rate of expended missiles.

The Caimen Standoff jammer was a standoff jammer against early warning radars and not the HAWK missile system. The Mirage F-1s that were carrying it flew over the Iraqi territory and never flew over Iranian territory. No Mirage F-1 carrying Caimen was ever shot down by Iranian Hawks.

In describing the events at Dezful AB, our friend Tom resorts to the usage of the highly exaggerated and extremely inflated Iranian stories about the war which has to betaken with extreme caution by any serious person. They look like dream fantasies more than real world facts.

Iraq never received or operated the Mig-25BM or Mig-25 RBT SEAD aircrafts nor did this aircraft set its foot on Iraqi soil or roamed its skies. Iraq acquired the Kh-58 only with the arrival of the SU-24 after the war. It contracted the Kh-31 but never received it. The Iraqi EW equipment and experience was more than enough in countering the deteriorating the Iranian AD as a whole.

Tom's stories about the Iranian air defence in the battle of Faw in 1986 were very far from reality, they are based upon Iranian claim stories none of which happened in actual combat. The Iranians never managed to shoot down 12 or 9 aircrafts per day. The maximum they achieved was shooting two aircrafts during one of the days. The two aircrafts were not from the same formation or package. During the battle that lasted from February9th 1986 to early April 1986 the Iranian Hawk batteries claimed more than 71 aircraft shot don by them alone. The truth was that the IrAF performed thousands of CAS and interdiction sorties with the total loss of 23 fighters only, and that was due to all type of Iranian AD. No Iraqi TU-22 was ever sent to Kharg Island, how did the Iranians perceived the Iraqis had done so, I don’t know? Maybe the Iranians were so extensively battered and shocked that they never envisaged what hit them."

(Ahmad Rushdi)

Edited December 26, 2012 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

... so you're saying that SAMs are speed-bumps? :D

 

Or rather, not you, but someone you quoted but didn't source.

 

Iran just wasn't well supplied with by comparison it seems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War#Comparison_of_Iraqi_and_Iranian_military_strength

Edited December 26, 2012 by GGTharos

[Teknetinium]

... so you're saying that SAMs are speed-bumps? :D

 

Or rather, not you, but someone you quoted but didn't source.

 

Iran just wasn't well supplied with by comparison it seems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War#Comparison_of_Iraqi_and_Iranian_military_strength

 

 

Im trying to show example of X-factors that can play in. Im sure there is better examples then this thou.

[GGTharos]

Yes, but these X-Factors will never be factors in-game.

 

MIM-23A had no ECCM for example. You will never see perfect ECM in-game ... if you did, I know you would complain loudly because you would never get first shot on an F-15 ;)

[Shein]

This should prove the usefullness of the AMRAAMin WVR combat.

 

UrYcxXIg5fI

 

Note: it was the very first engagement with an AIM-120A.

 

Having said this, I was successfull in an ortogonal roll against an AIM-120C the first time I played FC3 and got shot at, but achieved numerous hits at similar ranges. Its not an end of them all missile by any means, but definatly usefull. We need a functional AIM-9 to avoid having to use 120's all the time.

 

Let me preface this by saying I read all 27 pages of this thread. Took me half a day.

That being said, it was a half a day well spent :joystick: I understand missiles wayyy better than I ever did before.

 

but +1 to what pilotasso said, the AIM-9's are worthless in FC3. I did the entire DACT for the F-15 (taken from FC2 into FC3) and the heaters only stages were insane. Most of the time I ran out of them and had to use guns. And a WVR slow turn battle is not where you want to be in an F-15 against 27's or 29's. At a head on aspect, I was literally unable to achieve a lock against Mig-29's for whatever reason, no matter how close we got while the russians had no problem popping out R-70 after R-70 at me. (it did work against other aircraft, including su-27's although not all the time) I know the seeker needs to see things like afterburners to have a good lock but still, the missile should have been able to see *something* the closer we got... but they'd fly by every time with nothing.

then again I've heard thats what the AIM-9 is like in real life; kind of mediocre.

So bottom line is, is that realistic? or am I just doing something wrong? :book:

[GGTharos]

AIM-9's, like a lot of other missiles are being tuned. They'll get better.

 

The AFM for missiles basically upset everything, and missiles need to be re-tuned based on their new kinematics. It's going to take a little while.

[Shein]

Alright awesome, I look forward to that

And I look forward to doing the DACT over and over with each new iteration!

Talk about replayability....:D:D:D

[Teknetinium]

GG, I assume I would not if I was in Su-27S from 1984 while you use something that was implemented in 2001 (AIM-120C).

But dont worry GG, I hope there is enough data one day where I can meet you in Su-35UB vs F-15E.

 

F-18F has to think twice approaching Su-27MKI whit AESA. It will for sure not look and feel like thouse Su-27S from 80s.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Teknetinium

[Pilotasso]

Actually the MKI radar is PESA, the superbug an AESA. Plus, its the latter that has an advantage in BVR due to the radar, missiles and better overal defensive features. The area where the flanker would compete with the bug would be WVR due to better kinetic performance.

 

Also, 70% of planes Russia flies (and many export cutumers) are 80's tech (like the Su-27S) with a few updates here and there.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Pilotasso

[streakeagle]

I did the entire DACT for the F-15 (taken from FC2 into FC3) and the heaters only stages were insane. Most of the time I ran out of them and had to use guns. And a WVR slow turn battle is not where you want to be in an F-15 against 27's or 29's. At a head on aspect, I was literally unable to achieve a lock against Mig-29's for whatever reason, no matter how close we got while the russians had no problem popping out R-70 after R-70 at me.

 

In the IRM stage of the F-15C DACT missions, the AIM-9P is issued to the F-15C, which is not capable of a head-on shot.

[Cali]

Yes, but these X-Factors will never be factors in-game.

 

MIM-23A had no ECCM for example. You will never see perfect ECM in-game ... if you did, I know you would complain loudly because you would never get first shot on an F-15 ;)

 

"Need to spread rep around"

 

GG, I assume I would not if I was in Su-27S from 1984 while you use something that was implemented in 2001 (AIM-120C).

But dont worry GG, I hope there is enough data one day where I can meet you in Su-35UB vs F-15E.

 

F-18F has to think twice approaching Su-27MKI whit AESA. It will for sure not look and feel like thouse Su-27S from 80s.

 

It will be a team fight because US jets don't fly alone. Which team has better tactics and are better flying as a team. Not to mention all the other things that come into play, other flights, better missiles and AWACS.

 

Actually the MKI radar is PESA, the superbug an AESA. Plus, its the latter that has an advantage in BVR due to the radar, missiles and better overal defensive features. The area where the flanker would compete with the bug would be WVR due to better kinetic performance.

 

Also, 70% of planes Russia flies (and many export cutumers) are 80's tech (like the Su-27S) with a few updates here and there.

 

You sure about that Pilotasso, because Tek is a 27 fan. I think you need to check your sources again. :D

[Teknetinium]

Cali Im aviation fan when DCS fighter is out what ever it might be Ill be all over it, You know where to find us then.

Yes I have been flying Flanker in Flanker 2.0, FC1, 2 and 3, That was just to show you that even not best aircraft and missiles can be a match against the best if approched whit well working tactics and teamwork. I have proved it to my self.

 

Im sick of being underdog all the time, there is machines that are better then Su-27S modell to fight F-15C, it will be nice to fly DCS fighter all this underdog feelings will be gone. And I hope ED develops aircrafts that can match each other.

 

MIG-21 or MIG-29A will just not cut it against F-18C/F-15C or F-16 block?

I would be happy whit F-16Block? vs F-18C as well but you must agee it would be funnier for you to shot me down if I was in Su-27SM ;)

Edited December 27, 2012 by Teknetinium

[Wolf One]

I can never subscribe to the philosophy that something is just too sophisticated to implement and would pose an unfair advantage to others. That's like being the smartest kid with Down's syndrome, or the fastest runner at the Special Olympics. There are indivduals here who undoubtedly operate very well in air combat. But the pure interceptor role is definitely lacking. Without the interceptor, things would be carnage for the rest, and other pieces of the puzzle would simply be in shambles. You have to establish control over the air before you can do anything else in an organized way. Have dedicated servers or setups for 15 on 15 engagements and see what you do. Sometimes it really is more about the ride than the destination. The P-51 is like that, although I do enjoy it. The A-10C, for example, is not supersonic, but I can appreciate it simply for being good at what it does.

[Cali]

Cali Im aviation fan when DCS fighter is out what ever it might be Ill be all over it, You know where to find us then.

Yes I have been flying Flanker in Flanker 2.0, FC1, 2 and 3, That was just to show you that even not best aircraft and missiles can be a match against the best if approched whit well working tactics and teamwork. I have proved it to my self.

 

Im sick of being underdog all the time, there is machines that are better then Su-27S modell to fight F-15C, it will be nice to fly DCS fighter all this underdog feelings will be gone. And I hope ED develops aircrafts that can match each other.

 

MIG-21 or MIG-29A will just not cut it against F-18C/F-15C or F-16 block?

I would be happy whit F-16Block? vs F-18C as well but you must agee it would be funnier for you to shot me down if I was in Su-27SM ;)

 

I'd be happy to shoot down anyone in the 51st, you guys are good in a team or by yourselves. I've had more then a few good fights against Frostie. I'm gonna be a noob when I get back anyway, haven't flown FC in over a year. I've said this before, I don't care what jet gets upgraded, as long as it's legit and its not something that the real jet doesn't, can't use or never tested. You could always join the dark side like Breakshot :D and fly the 15. From the looks of Vipers list, things are getting better. The new 27 pit should be very nice to, when it's released. I can only hope that the other pits will follow until we have them as DCS jets and not FC ones.

[Pilotasso]

You dont have to go far to play balanced teams... with F-15C's on both sides. The eagles falls for AMRAAM's just as easy as flankers do. :)

[Exorcet]

It's not very often that I like seeing F-15's on both sides. A good balancer, but not all that realistic.

 

I'd rather the Red side use their GCI. And as we're flying over Russia, might as well give them their SAM's and IADS.

[159th_Viper]

A good balancer, but not all that realistic....

 

How so?

 

There is more than one nation that utilises the F-15. 15's are not nevessarily restricted to the Blue coalition.

[VMFA117_Poko]

How so?

 

There is more than one nation that utilises the F-15. 15's are not nevessarily restricted to the Blue coalition.

True. I would even vote for F-15 in Russian Coalition with aggressor skin. Or maybe whole new nation called Aggressors or something like that. This should happen sooner or later - everyone remember that we're waiting for Nevada map, yes?