Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I thought they were pretty easy to dodge in FC2. They were even easier in FC1, a few high G turns and it was done.

 

I won't argue with that. They can be dodged. It was more of an issue with the fact the 54 was made to shoot down bombers and cruise missiles. It could shoot down fighters, but crews would use Aim7 for that. Anyways, testing should be done on all missiles. There are a lot of simmers who play offline or against AI only. If anyone finds anything off about the AI launched A2A missiles please report and submit tracks.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

  • Replies 649
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Doing some testing and watching the Tacview tracks.

 

Why are alot of ERs simply losing track/going for a point behind the target? target is not in the notch and has not chaffed. Lock is maintained and the ER has plenty of energy (Speed >2000km/h)

 

Do they randomly just lose interest and wander off?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Posted

They really should not do such things. Usually there is a reason for such behavior - but AFAIK seeker logic has not changed since FC2.

 

It is possible that they are running out of hydraulic fluid however. How long (in time) is the shot? After about 60 sec they may no longer be controllable.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

Ok. Also check if you are being Rminned or in some other way you're firing missiles out of parameters. Or upload the tacviews :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
Doing some testing and watching the Tacview tracks.

 

Why are alot of ERs simply losing track/going for a point behind the target? target is not in the notch and has not chaffed. Lock is maintained and the ER has plenty of energy (Speed >2000km/h)

 

Do they randomly just lose interest and wander off?

 

water, sun whats in the back ground?

"any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back",  W Forbes.

"Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts",
"He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," Winston Churchill.

MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-128gb PC3200 |zotac RTX 5080|Game max 1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus||

Posted
water, sun whats in the back ground?

 

He is firing ER's not ET's, so that shouldn't be a problem, unless I missed something?

i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED

 

Posted
They really should not do such things. Usually there is a reason for such behavior - but AFAIK seeker logic has not changed since FC2.

 

It is possible that they are running out of hydraulic fluid however. How long (in time) is the shot? After about 60 sec they may no longer be controllable.

 

I'm afraid not.

If seeker logic has not changed since FC2, HOJ should work as it does in FC2.

In fact, HOJ is broken in FC3.

Posted
He is firing ER's not ET's, so that shouldn't be a problem, unless I missed something?

 

What's wrong, your missile run out of guidance power in the 1000s it took for the radar pulse to get back to earth? :D

 

Also AFAIK HOJ does work, but only with the AIM-7, AIM-120, and R-77. However normally one would wait for burn through to fire these weapons anyways.

If you aim for the sky, you will never hit the ground.

Posted
It is possible that they are running out of hydraulic fluid however.

 

It's a closed loop system, do you mean hydraulic pressure?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

Or that. Basically you have limited controllability time.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
AIM-54, R-33, R-24, basically everything air to air.

 

and birds too. :D

[sigpic][/sigpic]

US Air Force Retired, 1C371

No rank or title will ever be as important as the unit patch you wear.

Posted

That would make sense then GG. Loss of hydraulic pressure due to a low power supply would decrease the effectiveness of control surfaces.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted (edited)

Ok guys,

 

Please look at the provided track (I'm on laptop ATM, so excuse me if some views are weird in the beginning of the track) and tell me what's going on!

 

I've made a very simple, quick mission, 4 F-15 vs 4 SU-27 all Excellent AI, no humans (I really don't know the better way to exclude human factor from the equation - we are left with pure software simulation of airplanes and missile dynamics without subjective, human/patriotic/fan-boy factor).

 

Typicall loads, with 8xAMRAAM load for the Eagle. Typical load for SU-27

 

Result is as following:

 

4:0 for Eagles :doh:

 

Missiles fired:

 

Blue side: 6 x AIM-120B, 3 x AIM-120C

Red side : 4 x R27ER, 1 x R27ET

 

Missiles hit (kills):

 

Blue side : 1 x AIM-120B, 3 X AIM-120C

Red side : nill

PK:

 

Blue Side:

 

AIM-120B 17%

AIM-120C 100% !? :megalol:

 

Red side:

 

R-27ER 0%

R-27ET 0%

 

:music_whistling:

4vs4 excellent.trk

Edited by danilop
Posted (edited)

OK, kid falls asleep :) ...

 

Now

 

16 vs 16 is very interesting (only AIM-120c for Eagles)

 

It's 16:6 for Eagles plus 2 lost to friendly fire (AIM-120c going haywire)

 

So Blue fired 58 AIM-120c (majority WVR) and hit 19 targets - 16 Reds, 2 Blues (team kill) and 1 AMRAAM - so PK is roughly 33% in a massive fight including dogfight.

 

Reds failed miserably - their missiles are obviously way inferior.

 

Most of the kills happened in WVR where SU-27 should have decisive advantage.

Edited by danilop
Posted
OK, kid falls asleep :) ...

 

Now

 

16 vs 16 is very interesting (only AIM-120c for Eagles)

 

It's 16:6 for Eagles plus 2 lost to friendly fire (AIM-120c going haywire)

 

So Blue fired 58 AIM-120c (majority WVR) and hit 19 targets - 16 Reds, 2 Blues (team kill) and 1 AMRAAM - so PK is roughly 33% in a massive fight including dogfight.

 

Reds failed miserably - their missiles are obviously way inferior.

 

Most of the kills happened in WVR where SU-27 should have decisive advantage.

 

And???

 

Why are you comparing that type of misiles?

 

Why do you don´t make the same test but instead of Su-27 you use Mig-29S equipped whit R-77?

 

I think it´s a fairer contest.

Posted

Now it's getting really funny

 

16 x F-15 only 120c vs 16 x Mig-29s only R77 (all AI excellent)

 

Result 16:1 for Eagles (again, almost all kills WVR)!

 

MiGs fired 29 R77 and managed only one kill, so PK for R77 in FC3 is only 3.5%.

 

:megalol:

Posted
OK, kid falls asleep :) ...

 

Now

 

16 vs 16 is very interesting (only AIM-120c for Eagles)

 

It's 16:6 for Eagles plus 2 lost to friendly fire (AIM-120c going haywire)

 

So Blue fired 58 AIM-120c (majority WVR) and hit 19 targets - 16 Reds, 2 Blues (team kill) and 1 AMRAAM - so PK is roughly 33% in a massive fight including dogfight.

 

Reds failed miserably - their missiles are obviously way inferior.

 

Most of the kills happened in WVR where SU-27 should have decisive advantage.

 

I am afraid that the whole logic behind your test is faulty - i.e. that leaving out the human factor will help better determine the state of missile modelling. It will do the contrary - AI isn't sophisticated enough to employ tactics necessary to counter the obvious disadvange of using SARH vs. the other side using ARH missiles.

 

An AI controlled aircraft will simply drop everything and start evasive manounvering when a missile is launched at it - this is the case for both sides, but with SARHs a lost lock means a lost target, while with ARHs there is still a good chance that the missiles will find their targets autonomously....especially if fired at relatively close range.

JJ

Posted
Now it's getting really funny

 

16 x F-15 only 120c vs 16 x Mig-29s only R77 (all AI excellent)

 

Result 16:1 for Eagles (again, almost all kills WVR)!

 

MiGs fired 29 R77 and managed only one kill, so PK for R77 in FC3 is only 3.5%.

 

:megalol:

 

That on the other hand looks odd - even when taking into account that the F-15 enjoys a radar range advantage.

JJ

Posted

Yeah it's random ...

 

2nd pass 16:4 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 37 shot 4 hits PK 11%

3rd pass 16:8 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 46 shot 8 hits PK 17%

4th pass 16:3 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 26 shot 3 hits PK 11%

 

Average for four passes 16 F-15c vs 16 MiG 29s only active radar missiles:

 

16:4 for Eagles, PK of R77 11%

Posted
I am afraid that the whole logic behind your test is faulty - i.e. that leaving out the human factor will help better determine the state of missile modelling. It will do the contrary - AI isn't sophisticated enough to employ tactics necessary to counter the obvious disadvange of using SARH vs. the other side using ARH missiles.

 

An AI controlled aircraft will simply drop everything and start evasive manounvering when a missile is launched at it - this is the case for both sides, but with SARHs a lost lock means a lost target, while with ARHs there is still a good chance that the missiles will find their targets autonomously....especially if fired at relatively close range.

 

Look at ARH results ;)

 

Guys, try it ...

 

Create simple mission and try ...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...