Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[OB1]

The Pk in real life, in all combat situations was very good when the missile was shot in good parameters.

 

People don't realize that a lot of shots take place in poor parameters (very long range, bandit near the notch, etc).

 

Ah, cheers. The kind of civilized response I was after.

 

So do you think its modelled in DCS fairly well and people are just launching in bad/poor conditions ?

 

Since 1991 the Aim120 has scored 6 BVR kills for 13 missiles launched a 46% kill ratio.

 

Are you saying only 13 Aim120's have been launched in combat scenarios since 1991 ?

Edited May 19, 2014 by OB1

[GGTharos]

Most of which are attributable to:

 

- Shooting long-range to push the enemy away

- Shooting into a bandit near the notch

- Multiple missiles launched at targets, making it impossible to account for all hits

 

So actually, the Pk turns out to be quite good.

 

Since 1991 the Aim120 has scored 6 BVR kills for 13 missiles launched a 46% kill ratio.

 

The name Slammer originates from the first 3 AIM120 kill all being achieved with 1 missile/1 hit. These were all over the Iraqi No fly zone. There have been a number of misses since.

[GGTharos]

There are issues with the modeling, and most people shoot out of parameters.

 

So do you think its modelled in DCS fairly well and people are just launching in bad/poor conditions ?

[whiteladder]

 

 

 

Are you saying only 13 Aim120's have been launched in combat scenarios since 1991 ?

 

The 120 has achieved 10 kills 6 BVR and 4 within visual range. I can only find the kill/launch figures for the BVR kill, so I`m not sure of the total PK.

[blkspade]

No many shots fired in ideal conditions can still miss. I myself on maybe 3 occasions have evaded head-on AIM-120 shots from as close as 6nm. There is still the random glitch where a missile will disappear immediately after launch (self destruct).

[OB1]

The 120 has achieved 10 kills 6 BVR and 4 within visual range. I can only find the kill/launch figures for the BVR kill, so I`m not sure of the total PK.

 

What about the incident where Mig-25's out ran 10 missiles :D I suppose that should be excluded from the tally as they were dreaming to shoot at such ranges and speeds.

[whiteladder]

Ok found this

 

Current AIM-120 has demonstrated ~0.59 pK in combat to date, 17 missiles fired for 10 kills.

[OB1]

Ok found this

 

Current AIM-120 has demonstrated ~0.59 pK in combat to date, 17 missiles fired for 10 kills.

 

Credible source ? Link ? To be honest I don't expect anyone to find accurate data floating around on the internet.

[Kenan]

Ok found this

 

Current AIM-120 has demonstrated ~0.59 pK in combat to date, 17 missiles fired for 10 kills.

 

Let's presume the stats are right. But against what opponents? Did all of the engaged/shot down pilots knew they were being launched at? What were the circumstances? Serbian MiG pilots for example, due to the malfunction of SPO (in some cases) had to visually ID the missiles before trying to evade them.

 

Thing is, in DCS World all our equipment works flawlessly and we always know where the threat is (at least in general) and we're not really subjects to RL G-Forces real pilots are, and we can make those crazy turns just in time to spoof the missiles.

[GGTharos]

Yep, and 4 of them are known to have been shot in poor parameters. So, how does that Pk look now? .76 or so?

 

Ok found this

 

Current AIM-120 has demonstrated ~0.59 pK in combat to date, 17 missiles fired for 10 kills.

[GGTharos]

Let's presume the stats are right. But against what opponents? Did all of the engaged/shot down pilots knew they were being launched at? What were the circumstances? Serbian MiG pilots for example, due to the malfunction of SPO (in some cases) had to visually ID the missiles before trying to evade them.

 

You're not going to see the missile coming at you visually unless it's a huge SAM or has a big smoke/vapor plume pointing you at it.

 

Given that others with functioning RWR had trouble dodging sparrows, I think that's a non-issue.

[Kenan]

You're not going to see the missile coming at you visually unless it's a huge SAM or has a big smoke/vapor plume pointing you at it.

 

Given that others with functioning RWR had trouble dodging sparrows, I think that's a non-issue.

 

I was just saying, even if 120 was "perfectly" modelled in-game, the conditions are still not the same as in real world. As for the visually IDing missile, that's what serbian pilots said in the documentaries I watched. Either those missiles were fired from high altitude and they were fortunate to see them right after they were launched (seeing the initial smoke trail) or they were simply lying about it, which I seriously doubt is the case.

[OB1]

You claim that the RL AIM120 has a LOW pk and then demand others to post their sources. Where is your credible source? Link?

 

The lowest pk number and the one that is most common on wikis, defense expert forums, pilot forums etc. is the aforementioned 0.43, and as Tharos already mentioned this one is on the low side because of multiple missles launched at the same target (as well as from unfavorable poistions etc.)

 

And now you pipe in.

 

karambiatos did a good job at explaining my source. I could give you a plethora of links stating this and that and pretty much get it to say whatever truth I want, as I said the internet is a very dangerous place, hope you don't believe everything you read. Besides you are still disregarding how my original post was written, I never stated or stated as fact anything. Your fire started burning the moment you started writing your first response. I don't mind your responses just leave the attitude out.

[GGTharos]

You wrote you were 'pretty sure' that the Pk of the AIM-120 was pretty poor in real life.

 

.59 is not poor at all, and that includes all launches. The analysis was written up by some pretty smart dudes, but it doesn't go into details. It doesn't tell you the performance of the missile - it has to be put in context and it tells you how your missiles will be used up, but not what their performance is or is not.

 

That said, performance is part of that equation, and that Pk is twice the most current sparrow Pk. So I'd say those slammers are doing quite well.

 

And now you pipe in.

 

karambiatos did a good job at explaining my source. I could give you a plethora of links stating this and that and pretty much get it to say whatever truth I want, as I said the internet is a very dangerous place, hope you don't believe everything you read. Besides you are still disregarding how my original post was written, I never stated or stated as fact anything. Your fire started burning the moment you started writing your first response. I don't mind your responses just leave the attitude out.

[TAW_Blaze]

I was just saying, even if 120 was "perfectly" modelled in-game, the conditions are still not the same as in real world. As for the visually IDing missile, that's what serbian pilots said in the documentaries I watched. Either those missiles were fired from high altitude and they were fortunate to see them right after they were launched (seeing the initial smoke trail) or they were simply lying about it, which I seriously doubt is the case.

 

Sparrows can be spotted due to the smoke trail, not so much the AMRAAM. If you know where to look you can find it ingame if you're near WVR. But IRL pilots don't have the zoom function.

 

Thing is, it's not just that it's far from real world performance, but it just does stuff that defy all logic. Don't get me wrong I'm not an expert on the matter but I've seen enough tacviews of ridicoulus stuff happening that are anything but guidance. Often the AMRAAM will loft much much harder in a scenario where it didn't need to. Often it'll fly a path that is completely idiotic. Some of these things don't affect the ER for instance because that missile's guidance is much simpler and will generally fly PN towards the target instead of lofting and whatnot. Not stating that ERs have no problems though.

 

Obviously stuff like this could be a result of multiple things, could be network, coded logic flaw, or a mix of both, just to line up a few, so you'd probably have to test it in an offline environment. If it looks good offline then it's probably the network. Now I'm not saying this hasn't been ever looked at, just that I've never heard about it.

[falcon_120]

Any statitician worth his name would say that anything from 10-20-30 shots are nothing to make a PK percentage that says anything meaningful. You need a weapon well proven in combat and I would says at least hundreds of shots.

 

Just saying that the amraam pk is .59 or .76 or .87 is nothing more than illusory. This can be applied to almost any modern missile as luckily for us there have not been any need to shoot them in large quantities.

[Kenan]

Ive seen the serbian documentary on the NATO bombing of Serbia and Kosovo and I think you have mixed up your facts a little bit.

 

No I haven't. The documentary I saw clearly had one of the pilots saying he saw the missile trails from high altitude. I presume you're from the ex-Yugoslavia so you should know the language they speak.

 

So once again, either it was true or they were simply lying about it and I don't think that's the case.

[Pilotasso]

Who are you and what have you done to kenan? :D

 

In all seriousness, missiles are WIP and in their AFM infancy. The best times are yet in the future. Im patiently awaiting. :)

[Altimaden]

Well I'm impatiently waiting. Want better missiles nao!

[USARStarkey]

Just to touch on what GGTharos mentioned, Pk is a terrible measure of missile performance. As a historical example, the AIM-7 in Vietnam got a Pk of only 20 percent if memory serves correctly. Doubtless the missiles of this age had plenty of issues, but it did not take 5 missiles to down every plane. The extremely low Pk of the 60-70's missiles is the result of how the results were tabulated and how the missiles were used. Due to some of the real issues with the missiles, pilots often fired 4 missiles right after another before even observing to see if the first one hit. This means that even if 3 of the 4 missiles hit the target, that is still only a Pk of .25! Missile problems were also exacerbated by pilots firing the missiles well outside the launch parameters of the missiles; ie; trying to things with the missiles they weren't capable of doing even on paper.

The modern AAM's are the product of 40 years of missile and computer advancement. Nearly half a century. Do I really need to say more here?

Also keep in mind that a weapons accuracy is a difficult thing to quantify. I doubt anyone would try to say that small arms are ineffective, but it you were to quantify their accuracy based on rounds fired/kills scored, you'd probably get the idea that either bullets are exceedingly inaccurate or people are incredibly tough! To use planes for example, late war gyro-gun sights allowed for very accurate shooting and planes carried enough ammo to easily make every pilot an ace, but you don't see everyone coming back with 20 kills a sortie. Same goes with modern jets. 75% or 100% of all missiles fired hit their targets, you would have a very short air war. A squadron of 16 F-15C's carries enough missiles to down half of Russia's 250 Mig-29's in a single engagement. You'd be hard pressed to find a single historical weapons system capable of actually getting results like that.

[Oberst Zeisig]

You claim that the RL AIM120 has a LOW pk and then demand others to post their sources. Where is your credible source? Link?

 

The lowest pk number and the one that is most common on wikis, defense expert forums, pilot forums etc. is the aforementioned 0.43, and as Tharos already mentioned this one is on the low side because of multiple missles launched at the same target (as well as from unfavorable poistions etc.)

 

And assuming those which hit were launched at targets that didnt take any evasive action due not knowing they're being launched on. How does the number look then?

[MVSokie]

[USARStarkey]

Also, this is just my opinion and I'm sure many others will disagree with my tactics, but the following is the best way I've found so far to kill Flankers hiding low with as little as 2 in game missiles.

 

1. fly High at 40k.

2. go as fast as you can with full burner, about 680 knots.

3. Fly over mountains and be scanning 80miles out at 20k or less. Sometimes 15k or less.

4. Find a Flanker or Fulcrum. Fire 1 missile in TWS as soon as you get LA. Continue to track the flanker once he goes defensive while maintaining speed/alt and only fire again if he try's to nose up for a return shot.

5. Once nearly directly over top of him, nose down and fire a second missile Straight Down at him. Make sure you fire the missile as straight as possible. Missile will drop from 40k to the deck without losing hardly any energy even when maneuvering. At this point, you can either follow him and make sure he dies, or nose back up to keep your energy depending on the situation.

6. Because the missile is going down, the Flanker cannot slink behind a mountain to avoid it. Because it is going straight down, it wont loose as much E. And finally, He will have a very very hard time hitting you at 40k. I have only seen someone dodge this 2 times, and I have hit 27/and 29s maneuvering at everything from corner speed to 750 knots TAS. Another thing I think makes it hard to dodge is the straight down shot seems to confuse people and they dont know which way to go in order to get away.

[TAW_Blaze]

If you do that you'll get killed every time by any half decent 27/29 pilot. They'll stay in the notch, you'll never see them and because you keep painting them they can tell the range. When they're inside 20nm it get's extremely difficult to find them from space altitude and it's really easy for them to get below you at that point. Then the next thing that happens is you're dead pretty much no matter what.

 

Firing at Rmax on a low guy does nothing for you, his DLZ is already zerod out by you being that high and him being so low, you can wait until a good range and take the shot the only thing you need to be worried about is diving on him, if you stay level out of contrails you'll lose him and he'll kill you. However straight diving contrails are pretty attractive so be ready to literally get gangbanged by everything in the area. If there are no other bandits, it'll work, but you can bet that's not happening in a server scenario.

 

The concept of not being able to duck behind mountains is flawed, if you have a missile diving on the target at that angle all he has to do is try to head towards the missile so he increases that dive angle even more. Near impact with clever maneuvering you can easily spoof it, won't really be able to distinguish from ground clutter. If he's really good at using the terrain he'll make you lose your lock and in a lot of cases you might not find him again.

[USARStarkey]

I dunno, we could debate this for ages. But Ill say this much: At 40k going full speed with stores, I barely have to sneeze to avoid a R-27 coming up at me. I have been fired on before doing this, and I haven't been hit once. In my experience, the notch isn't really that big of deal. They normally go into the notch right after I fire the for the first time, and then come out of it 10 seconds later with no idea where I'm at because they're pointing in the wrong direction and they aren't looking up.

Second, I have encountered multiple bandits just about every time I do this. Normally, they are all hiding in the mountains and have about the same chance as the target of hitting me. I am simply going far too fast to be hit. I never descend below 35,000ft unless I know my target is alone and I am greedy for the kill. If for some reason I miss, I zoom back to 40k and book it out of the AO or engage some other target that doesn't require me to turn around. I haven't done this against the AI at all. I've done it only in a "server scenario." I have only had TWO AIM-120s go stupid due to ground clutter out of dozens that did not.

I'm not sure what your on about with the mountains thing. You say I am wrong about not being able to duck into the mountains, and then describe avoiding my missile by......not using the mountains at all.

Also, it is EXTREMELY easy to predict where people will come out of the notch or our from behind a mountain. ANY Eagle driver worth his salt will require his bogey with ease. So far as I'm concerned, they can sit down their in the notch with their radars off all they want, blind and slow. Even if he knows where I'm at, and is particularly good at avoiding my shots, I can sit there and lob missiles at him if I absolutely have to and keep him defensive.

Edited May 20, 2014 by USARStarkey