Pilotasso Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 My advice about ER's... they will most likely miss (go for chaff) if fired while target is beyond 25-30Km... 20-25Km and they become more effective as target has much less time to react and get into beam etc... so, don't fire them at long ranges as they will miss (unless target does not go into beam and does not chaff). I have asked ED if they could try lower the RCS of the chaff tad more but I doubt they will do it. To be honest, I think the R-27ER is better than what we think, or else we would have real flankers taking ET's only. I read something about the R-27 series I'm researching on my literature and hope to find it and discuss it here. :) [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 (edited) My advice about ER's... they will most likely miss (go for chaff) if fired while target is beyond 25-30Km... 20-25Km and they become more effective as target has much less time to react and get into beam etc... so, don't fire them at long ranges as they will miss (unless target does not go into beam and does not chaff). I have asked ED if they could try lower the RCS of the chaff tad more but I doubt they will do it. But they are designed as a long range BVR missile! Why extend the range beyond the standard 'R' if they will missguide? I applaud ED for fixing the bug but in investigating the issue I think we have found the missiles to be more chaff hungry outside the notch then they should be. Imho missile launches should be respected and either full on notched or defeated kinematically. Crazy last second barrel rolling and dumping chaff outside the notch should be next to ineffective. At the moment it is 50-60% effective. Edited August 3, 2013 by ///Rage [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 That really depends on the missile. For example an older F-4 radar would have a relatively high probability of breaking lock head on or tail on if chaff was deployed, where you wouldn't expect say, an APG-63 to break lock. Also some effects are not well simulated, but longer-ranged targets may have an easier time using chaff defensively early on due to radar cell sizes and other factors. The newer the radar, the less susceptible it usually is to chaff. I'd personally prefer if chaff had a tiny effect outside of the beam, and the effect of it in the beam would be very big, but again reduced based on missile/radar era, to the point where you can start with a chaff-eater like a 7C/D to where a 120C is practically immune to it (.. and now, what about JAFF? :) ) But, all that is 'devil in the details' sort of stuff, DCSW does not simulate the reasons for strong ECCM, so until the simulation gets more complex, you'll always have some issues with head-on and tail-on chaff. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Seeker in the ER is sensitive to the chaff, no Radar! Why ARH is less susceptible to chaff? Because the angle of the central signal lines smaller than the SARH-Radar relation. Of the ARH, the transmitter is flush with the receiver. Of the SARH is not! Chaff is therefore detrimental effect on the seeker with SARH! 1 “The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” — George Orwell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 (edited) Seeker in the ER is sensitive to the chaff, no Radar! Why ARH is less susceptible to chaff? Because the angle of the central signal lines smaller than the SARH-Radar relation. Of the ARH, the transmitter is flush with the receiver. Of the SARH is not! Chaff is therefore detrimental effect on the seeker with SARH! Could you plz explain that again Ragnarok, Did not quite get it. If I understand what you mean? SARH is receiving only which gives the SARH missiles another angles to chaff compared to ARH missiles which is transmitting and receiving? Edited August 3, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 This is too complicated for me to explain in English. I will send Tehnetinium PM entire article about this, but the Serbian language. Tehnetinium understand some Serbian and he some still continue in English, explaining how he understood it. Ok? “The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” — George Orwell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 As far as the game is concerned the ARH missiles are less sensitive to chaff because they are newer technology than the SARH missiles represented in the game. Seeker in the ER is sensitive to the chaff, no Radar! Why ARH is less susceptible to chaff? Because the angle of the central signal lines smaller than the SARH-Radar relation. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 (edited) This is too complicated for me to explain in English. I will send Tehnetinium PM entire article about this, but the Serbian language. Tehnetinium understand some Serbian and he some still continue in English, explaining how he understood it. Ok? oki. Thank you Ragnarok. Edited August 3, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essah Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 as much as the Chaff rejection might be an important aspect for "realistic" or semis "realistic" missile behaviour then with chaff rejection being returned to previous value, I'm more concerned with the kinetics of the missile. Has this been improved on? When can we expect that to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 No comment. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essah Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 No comment. how come? would it be a problem to say that it has at least not been changed since the problem arose which has already been acknowledged officially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 I can tell you that it has not been changed. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 (edited) That really depends on the missile. For example an older F-4 radar would have a relatively high probability of breaking lock head on or tail on if chaff was deployed, where you wouldn't expect say, an APG-63 to break lock. Also some effects are not well simulated, but longer-ranged targets may have an easier time using chaff defensively early on due to radar cell sizes and other factors. The newer the radar, the less susceptible it usually is to chaff. I'd personally prefer if chaff had a tiny effect outside of the beam, and the effect of it in the beam would be very big, but again reduced based on missile/radar era, to the point where you can start with a chaff-eater like a 7C/D to where a 120C is practically immune to it (.. and now, what about JAFF? :) ) But, all that is 'devil in the details' sort of stuff, DCSW does not simulate the reasons for strong ECCM, so until the simulation gets more complex, you'll always have some issues with head-on and tail-on chaff. As far as the game is concerned the ARH missiles are less sensitive to chaff because they are newer technology than the SARH missiles represented in the game. I agree in principles but why complicate the issue? For the last 10 years the mainstay of the simulation and hence BVR combat has been 4 missiles- 120/7M/77/ER. We do not need to concern ourselves with Aim 7c/r23 or complex ECCM (we can barely model ECM). At 35km in a look up situation even if beaming an STT lock for the f15/27 is solid. If fired on the missile should guide and you should expect to die unless you notch (not just beam) the radar or defeat the missile kinematically. Another issue which Ragnarok may be alluding to is that in order to cause a SARH missile to missguide you must defeat the launching platform radar. This is the basis of my tests in the other thread. The SARH is passive seeker only and the radar return of a higher altitude beaming target is glorious. Much greater than relatively stationary chaff released a few kms back which is not even illuminated by an STT lock. Only If guiding in flood mode than you can make an argument for sarh misguiding to nearby illuminated chaff. With DCS F18 and DCS 15/27 afterwards BVR for the next 10 years will still revolve around those 4 missiles and we need to get it right! Edited August 4, 2013 by ///Rage [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 (edited) If fired on the missile should guide and you should expect to die unless you notch (not just beam) the radar or defeat the missile kinematically. Completely wrong. Chaff is effective in the beam, unless you're facing a modern slammer and in that case, an application of jaff if you have such a system can also work. There are other factors also which we know exist but we don't know what they are: Maneuvers can aid in chaff causing a miss. Simply put, the current simulation makes do with the simplest approach right now, and while it could be better, that's going to take time - how much time, I have no idea. (And FYI, yes, we do deal with R-23's and possibly old AIM-7's etc. While I realize that it's hard to believe that the vast majority of players do single play, that is how it is, and some of those old weapons are represented) Another issue which Ragnarok may be alluding to is that in order to cause a SARH missile to missguide you must defeat the launching platform radar.Does a towed decoy defeat the launching platform radar? ... No. Same deal for chaff. You can defeat either the TR or the missile's seeker. Much greater than relatively stationary chaff released a few kms back which is not even illuminated by an STT lock.Now that is a different story, and expecting it to be fixed right now might be optimistic. Edited August 4, 2013 by GGTharos [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 How is it effective in the beam? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Have you guys tested against other human players as well? My guess is that AI is cheating with chaff, on the other hand R-27ER's might not have the G limit to cope with aggressive dodging when done right, at least not as good as R-27R (because its much heavier with similar control surfaces). [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Have you guys tested against other human players as well? My guess is that AI is cheating with chaff, on the other hand R-27ER's might not have the G limit to cope with aggressive dodging when done right, at least not as good as R-27R (because its much heavier with similar control surfaces). They are missing well before that stage. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 (edited) ERs are almost the same as in 1.2.4, proved it to myself yesterday. Chaff is still way to effective, lunched at a bandits that was not executing proper notching or pincering where ERs were going for Chaff from 30km,25km,15km and 10. All missiles missed where R-73 had to do the job. The ER might be better against chaffs now but its barely noticeable. People can still approche ERs by not employing realistic defending maneuvers. . Some test will be conducted where 51st are comparing ER, to Aim-120B/C. If there is too great differences I would suggest that 51st will not allow aim-120C on servers because it is a missile from another decade which would not face Su-27S, but rahere Su-30,Su-27SM,Su-34,Su-35 and so on. 51st want alway the biggest challenge but we want realism as well, And As I see it aim-120C would not face a Su-27S model. To be honest I don't think that many had a BVR kill whit ER after FC3 realise, they all hit when you are in visual range if you are lucky. ;) Edited August 4, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 (edited) You can also dodge the AMRAAM frontally like the ER and then send an IR missile, I have several bruises in my face to prove it! :P But yeah work on missiles (and crashes) should be a priority at this time. ED should resist the temptation to add more content before fundamental things like this that are left to the dust for a long time hurting the costumer base. Just look what is happening to MechWarrior online. Successful business model but more bugs after 1 year than falcon 4 at launch. It has got to be a feat. Edited August 4, 2013 by Pilotasso 1 [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 I don't understand the question. Do you want a technical explanation? If so? , when in the beam, chaff and the plane have very similar doppler shifts, and the chaff will usually have the higher RCS. How is it effective in the beam? [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepin1234 Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Some test will be conducted where 51st are comparing ER, to Aim-120B/C. If there is too great differences I would suggest that 51st will not allow aim-120C on servers because it is a missile from another decade which would not face Su-27S, but rahere Su-30,Su-27SM,Su-34,Su-35 and so on. 51st want alway the biggest challenge but we want realism as well, And As I see it aim-120C would not face a Su-27S model. To be honest I don't think that many had a BVR kill whit ER after FC3 realise, they all hit when you are in visual range if you are lucky. ;) +1 Good Point. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
159th_Falcon Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 ERs are almost the same as in 1.2.4, proved it to myself yesterday. Chaff is still way to effective, lunched at a bandits that was not executing proper notching or pincering where ERs were going for Chaff from 30km,25km,15km and 10. All missiles missed where R-73 had to do the job. The ER might be better against chaffs now but its barely noticeable. People can still approche ERs by not employing realistic defending maneuvers. . Some test will be conducted where 51st are comparing ER, to Aim-120B/C. If there is too great differences I would suggest that 51st will not allow aim-120C on servers because it is a missile from another decade which would not face Su-27S, but rahere Su-30,Su-27SM,Su-34,Su-35 and so on. 51st want alway the biggest challenge but we want realism as well, And As I see it aim-120C would not face a Su-27S model. To be honest I don't think that many had a BVR kill whit ER after FC3 realise, they all hit when you are in visual range if you are lucky. ;) I had 4 or 5 ER kills beyond 20 km last night while flying whit someone else. We incured one hit and zero losses. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepin1234 Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 I had 4 or 5 ER kills beyond 20 km last night while flying whit someone else. We incured one hit and zero losses. well this is possible, but only when the F-15 Pilot did some mistake or you evade their 120. I dont see your fight but normally when we launch the R-27ER at more than 25 km and the F-15 start countermesure dispence and turn a Little, the R-27ER is a miss 100 %. If we see the speed of our R-27ER, the relation of lossing speed per maneuver, the range and the chaff effect, all that compared with the aim-120 features, then you get the russian fighters are still in trouble. The strategy of the F-15 is very simple and the result for the R-27ER is catastrophic. They have set the R-27ER better now, but only closer than 25 km ( in the 1.2.4 every R-27 was a miss cuz chaff even at 10 km range ). Thats mean they still leave for the F-15 the oportunity to turn back when our R-27ER is at the middle of his track, just in case... but exactly at this distance the aim-120 get active. So 1.2.5 improvement mean, the only choise to try with the R-27ER against chaff is 25 km closer. So is the 1.2.5...:D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Pretty realistic actually. Thats mean they still leave for the F-15 the oportunity to turn back when our R-27ER is at the middle of his track, just in case... but exactly at this distance the aim-120 get active. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 I don't understand the question. Do you want a technical explanation? If so? , when in the beam, chaff and the plane have very similar doppler shifts, and the chaff will usually have the higher RCS. Ok good. But the ER missile is homing in on the radar return of the STT lock tracking radar. If the radar maintains lock (as it does in a look up situation) the ER will home in perfectly. Why should it track to chaff which is not illuminated? It has negligible rcs without radar illumination. Furthermore it currently misguides even at aspect 45° and not even a 90° beam? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts