Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[*Rage*]

I think the more pertinent question is what do the Devs make of it? Do you intend to repeat the work for other missiles?

[IASGATG]

I think the more pertinent question is what do the Devs make of it? Do you intend to repeat the work for other missiles?

 

I looked at the AIM-9 family and found that preliminary the curves and the thrust for the missile are pretty close to anything literature comes up with. CFD might gleam some greater accuracy on it, but if you have flight performance for an AIM-9L, the shape of the Mike is so similar that the Cd will be very minor. The motor is correct so that missile is fine.

 

I then considered doing the Sparrow because that missile is pretty damn broken. There is quite a bit of conflicting information when it comes to the Sparrow and without CFDing it I pretty much gave up on attempting to resolve the missile in the same way that I did for the AIM-9.

 

Then I looked at the R-27 family. First hurdle is that it's all in Russian, specifically technical Russian, so that makes life extremely difficult when you don't have a fluent Russian speaker who can translate scientific expressions from Russian to English. Next was gaining enough and accurate date on the Russian equipment.

 

Some playing was does with the 27ER, correcting the motor (As I've found making the motor accurate is perhaps the easiest part of anything) but then trying to make it with Russian Airforce tables of flight performance it is impossible to replicate in the game or generates a Cd curve that is absolutely unrealistic. Again would have to be CFD'd and then I'd want some sort of literature to help back up the CFD's analysis.

 

So the question becomes "Why not just CFD everything?" Well firstly the hassle of making all the 3D models is a couple of days work per missile to get a basic model that we could CFD, assuming we already know the exact specifications down to the airfoil shape of all the missiles. Secondly creating the boundary layers and solvers for the CFD for the missile, then running the weeks of computer time and then running coding a second solver for the output to turn the Cd curves into flight paths again. Basically a shit ton of ****ing work.

 

We did the first one has a hobby, to see if it could be done, to see how close we could get and see how the Dev's would respond to it. Given the response we are not eager to put x months into repeating the process again for nothing.

[Trailer]

Is it just me or have they completely gimped Slammers?

 

I've been playing ED games since Flanker 2.0, and I just recently got back into this series and bought FC3. However, AMRAAMs seem to be quite nearly useless. On a 180 aspect at 10 miles, I should be Pitbull, yet they seem to miraculously avoid my slammers. Sure, a few get through, but I usually end up just getting two kills or so and expending ALL of my Slammers.

 

Did ED gimp them on purpose to give the eastern aircraft more of a chance? I mean, I know the Su-27 is a formidable aircraft (actually my favorite) and the AMRAAMski is as well, but sometimes I feel like the entire envelope was dumbed down on the Eagles. I know it's FC3 and not a true simulator, but does anyone have any tips or links for BVR in this game?

 

I'm not talking about tactics, I'm fully versed in tactics as I used to be a GCI controller. I'm talking about how to do this in FC3 since the game suspends space and time and missiles seem to disobey laws of physics.

[WinterH]

120 isn't what it was in FC2 indeed, but if you think it's for balance, I'd suggest you try using R-77 too, while AIM-120 may be hit or miss currently, last time I tried R-77 couldn't be used for anything other than pure lols at how missile acts :).

 

Currently all missiles are, WIP apparently, and many suffer performance issues from both sides of fence. Same goes for some of the air to ground weapons like Kh-25ML, which got it's ranged almost halved after it got AFM update.

[Trailer]

Thanks for the info! I still love FC3, but I guess it's just going to be one of those things we all have to work past. Glad to know I'm not the only one.

 

I don't even wanna see the multiplayer difficulty.

[TAW_Blaze]

I'm not talking about tactics, I'm fully versed in tactics as I used to be a GCI controller. I'm talking about how to do this in FC3 since the game suspends space and time and missiles seem to disobey laws of physics.

 

They don't, the laws of physics have changed and the missiles have never learnt how to properly guide. :)

 

Forget about ranges, adapt, they are just a bunch of variables, you'll be comfortable with them in a week or two. Can't get comfortable with the nonsense guidance though. They are so bad and inconsistent you could never adapt to it.

[Trailer]

They don't, the laws of physics have changed and the missiles have never learnt how to properly guide. :)

 

Forget about ranges, adapt, they are just a bunch of variables, you'll be comfortable with them in a week or two. Can't get comfortable with the nonsense guidance though. They are so bad and inconsistent you could never adapt to it.

 

Yeah this is the advice I'm talking about...so ranges are pretty much moot then? I'll definitely keep this in mind. The nonsense guidance is ridiculous.

 

"Ohai MiG-29, this is AIM-120 here. I know I'm in active guidance right now, but I figured I'd just let you know that I'm gonna just do a nosedive into the dirt and ignore every single one of my characteristics."

 

I can adapt with no problem, but I'd like to know what I have to adapt to. This isn't a twitch first-person shooter; it's almost like they just said, "Let's make the flight model realistic but completely fudge every single combat aspect of it, just to mess with them." It's almost like combat were an afterthought. I can get X-Plane and just fly around and see the sights if that's the case.

[TAW_Blaze]

They aren't moot, they just don't matter. Old FC gravity used to have no effect on missiles and they had SFM aswell. Now they have AFM, they are a bit overly draggy so every missiles' range is shorter. In the end it's the same thing.

 

What I can't put up with is when you're in a situation where the guy should die 10/10 and then suddenly somehow survives for absolutely no reason and on top of all that shit he even kills you.

[Frostie]

Yeah this is the advice I'm talking about...so ranges are pretty much moot then? I'll definitely keep this in mind. The nonsense guidance is ridiculous.

 

"Ohai MiG-29, this is AIM-120 here. I know I'm in active guidance right now, but I figured I'd just let you know that I'm gonna just do a nosedive into the dirt and ignore every single one of my characteristics."

 

I can adapt with no problem, but I'd like to know what I have to adapt to. This isn't a twitch first-person shooter; it's almost like they just said, "Let's make the flight model realistic but completely fudge every single combat aspect of it, just to mess with them." It's almost like combat were an afterthought. I can get X-Plane and just fly around and see the sights if that's the case.

You just have to get used to the fact that in FC3 missiles are not death rays. Notching etc. are very effective defensive measures as opposed to other simulators, missiles have a tendency to try too hard.

 

That being said i've read articles about Swedish pilots discussing the Meteor and how difficult it will be to dodge because it accelerates when it reaches the target, in comparison they talked of consistently being able to confuse or outmaneuver AMRAAMs in simulators.

[Trailer]

They aren't moot, they just don't matter. Old FC gravity used to have no effect on missiles and they had SFM aswell. Now they have AFM, they are a bit overly draggy so every missiles' range is shorter. In the end it's the same thing.

 

What I can't put up with is when you're in a situation where the guy should die 10/10 and then suddenly somehow survives for absolutely no reason and on top of all that shit he even kills you.

 

Yep, that's what I'm talking about. I unloaded from an altitude advantage at 5 miles TWO AMRAAMs into a MiG-29 and he beat BOTH of them.

 

I got so pissed off that I went in and guns killed him, but just damaged him enough so he would crash into the mountain.

[Trailer]

You just have to get used to the fact that in FC3 missiles are not death rays. Notching etc. are very effective defensive measures as opposed to other simulators, missiles have a tendency to try too hard.

 

That being said i've read articles about Swedish pilots discussing the Meteor and how difficult it will be to dodge because it accelerates when it reaches the target, in comparison they talked of consistently being able to confuse or outmaneuver AMRAAMs in simulators.

 

Leave it to the Swedes. Too bad they practically gutted their military. Hopefully they'll keep up the R&D.

 

I have no problem defeating missiles; a simple notch can defeat them usually, depending on F-pole/E-pole. I know realistically that an Eagle and an AMRAAM are extremely hard to defeat, and I realize that we have to dumb things down a bit for simulators, but the fact remains that an F-15C with an AIM-120C is very poorly represented in FC3 in terms of capabilities. Ranges and such are always fudged because they're classified, obviously, but I know those ranges and I know what the real thing can do, and the issue isn't so much a question of it not being like the real thing but rather the possibility of it being severely hamstrung on purpose so as to not completely dominate every other airframe in the sim, which actually makes sense. It's just that I wish there could be some sort of sliding scale for realism (not game mode), so when people fight against each other, they could all be on some sort of even playing field. When you play alone, however, a Fulcrum shouldn't be trashing 2 slammer shots at 5 miles with an altitude disadvantage. Just no.

 

Missiles aren't death rays, but neither are they lawn darts...unless it's an AMRAAM, apparently.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Trailer

[Fishbreath]

The R-27ER has effectively countermeasures resistance, and the R-77 runs into the same problems the AMRAAM does. It's not hamstrung on purpose; everything air to air needs some TLC. (Although I suppose the MiG-21 is modeled about right. :P)

[Trailer]

I think I'm gonna break out the Flanker now. It has always been my one true love, even though the avionics run on tesla coils and gremlins. It's endearing to me. Such a beautiful bird.

[TAW_Blaze]

I know realistically that an Eagle and an AMRAAM are extremely hard to defeat, and I realize that we have to dumb things down a bit for simulators

 

I don't rule out the chance of being downscaled on purpose, but, every missile is suffering from basically the same problems. There is a "community project" ran by IASGATG and a few of his friends to rebuild the AMRAAM kinematically and as far as I can tell it's mostly finished. But putting that into the game would basically render every other plane that can't carry AMRAAMs downright useless. Your AMRAAM would have about twice the range of everything else that exists in the game. I doubt ED or anyone reasonable playing the game wants that.

 

but the fact remains that an F-15C with an AIM-120C is very poorly represented in FC3 in terms of capabilities. Ranges and such are always fudged because they're classified, obviously, but I know those ranges and I know what the real thing can do

 

You know what the real thing can do? This is some funny statement isn't it?

 

Amusingly enough, kinematic performance is the least classified. With the appropriate tools you can reverse engineer the whole thing and get an accurate model of it (just like IASGATG and his friends did).

 

Can we just quit arguing R A N G E already? It's useless. It doesn't matter.

 

The real problem with missiles is their god awful guidance and there's no one to fix it? Why?

[=Mac=]

I had the standard eight 120's and was at angels 40 painting some newbie headed towards me in the weeds for about 15 or so. He had no idea I was there (obviously) as his RWR does not look up and I was in TWS.

 

Fox 3.... Fox 3... Fox 3.... for all eight. One right after the other about 5 seconds apart. A friendly locked him from 3 o'clock and the bandit began climbing to my left. Four of my 120's missed but the fifth took him out followed by the sixth. (I don't remember what happened to the last two.)

 

The guy watched his replay (I guess) because about 10 minutes later he began complaining of 120 spam not being realistic. I replied that the first four missed him.

[Trailer]

I don't rule out the chance of being downscaled on purpose, but, every missile is suffering from basically the same problems. There is a "community project" ran by IASGATG and a few of his friends to rebuild the AMRAAM kinematically and as far as I can tell it's mostly finished. But putting that into the game would basically render every other plane that can't carry AMRAAMs downright useless. Your AMRAAM would have about twice the range of everything else that exists in the game. I doubt ED or anyone reasonable playing the game wants that.

 

 

 

You know what the real thing can do? This is some funny statement isn't it?

 

Amusingly enough, kinematic performance is the least classified. With the appropriate tools you can reverse engineer the whole thing and get an accurate model of it (just like IASGATG and his friends did).

 

Can we just quit arguing R A N G E already? It's useless. It doesn't matter.

 

The real problem with missiles is their god awful guidance and there's no one to fix it? Why?

 

Yes, I know what the real thing can do. I studied it, briefed it, controlled the fights, went to the ACMI de-briefs, and was stationed in Florida for two years where we controlled live-fire missile testing against drone F-4s by just about every fast-moving fighter squadron in the US, with some Navy and Marine squadrons visiting every now and then as well. Look up Combat Archer.

 

I've seen the Eagle take shots from what I thought were crazy ranges, only to actually get the kill. I'm not saying it should be like this, I'm simply saying that, in my opinion, ED may have hamstrung the AMRAAM a bit too much even in "simming" the missile.

 

Range IS important because without range, it's not BVR. Range determines tactics. Range is THE most important factor in all of this. It's needed to determine your shots as well as your adversaries' shots and when to retrograde or drag out. Doing a perch setup, going cold as a flight and getting a spike inventory and then pitching in all have to be done with strict adherence to RANGE.

 

I see what you're saying, however, and I agree that the missile's radar tracking needs to be buffed more than the ranges, but at the same time having to wait until 15 miles to launch an AMRAAM with an APG-63 is a lot like not even having BVR tactics at all.

[karambiatos]

I dont think the amramm will see any change until all the missiles are improved together, otherwise it wouldnt be much of a forum left.

[Trailer]

I dont think the amramm will see any change until all the missiles are improved together, otherwise it wouldnt be much of a forum left.

 

Obviously all missiles need to be improved, I'm just using the AMRAAM because it's the only one I've delved into so far. If you guys are saying that the R-77 is crippled just as the AMRAAM is, this sounds like it should be adjusted on the dev side.

[Corrigan]

Your AMRAAM would have about twice the range of everything else that exists in the game. I doubt ED or anyone reasonable playing the game wants that.

 

Nonsense. This is not Counter-Strike with planes. Realism above all, and red-blue balance must not interfere with that. Regarding your "anyone reasonable" comment, I think many more people would agree with me than you.

[blkspade]

You just have to get used to the fact that in FC3 missiles are not death rays. Notching etc. are very effective defensive measures as opposed to other simulators, missiles have a tendency to try too hard.

 

That being said i've read articles about Swedish pilots discussing the Meteor and how difficult it will be to dodge because it accelerates when it reaches the target, in comparison they talked of consistently being able to confuse or outmaneuver AMRAAMs in simulators.

 

I think most are willing to accept the effectiveness of the notch. The real frustration comes from those who defeat AMRAAMs head-on, and continue to press when they should technically be at a disadvantage. I actually have a better chance at killing them with the Sparrow, or sidewinder even if things get really sketchy.

[TAW_Blaze]

Nonsense. This is not Counter-Strike with planes. Realism above all, and red-blue balance must not interfere with that. Regarding your "anyone reasonable" comment, I think many more people would agree with me than you.

 

The point is if you change the AMRAAM but you skip the others you're not making it more realistic, you're just creating bullshit.

 

I've seen the Eagle take shots from what I thought were crazy ranges, only to actually get the kill. I'm not saying it should be like this, I'm simply saying that, in my opinion, ED may have hamstrung the AMRAAM a bit too much even in "simming" the missile.

 

Or you want it to be too real. This is a friggin game and as much as I want it to it's not getting much closer to anything realistic. Even the so called FULL REALISM A-10C has next to nothing to do with the real airframe. But people tend to forget this in their clickable barbie house.

 

Range determines tactics.

 

Other than influencing radar operation and ECM (which does not exist in this game anyway) it doesn't do that much. Range is just a parameter to adjust you can do everything more or less the same it'll work just fine. You fire earlier or later, go defensive earlier or later, do X maneuver earlier later, it just doesn't matter.

 

but at the same time having to wait until 15 miles to launch an AMRAAM with an APG-63 is a lot like not even having BVR tactics at all.

 

Remind me again how many kills were scored in actual combat beyond 15nm. Not a lot eh? BVR is anything beyond 5nm or less, ingame you won't see anything outside 3nm unless you're fully zoomed in and know exactly where to look. There's exactly 1 element of BVR missing and it's the goddamn ECM. We're never getting that though.

[SDsc0rch]

Range IS important because without range, it's not BVR. Range determines tactics. Range is THE most important factor in all of this. It's needed to determine your shots as well as your adversaries' shots and when to retrograde or drag out. Doing a perch setup, going cold as a flight and getting a spike inventory and then pitching in all have to be done with strict adherence to RANGE.

+1

 

Nonsense. This is not Counter-Strike with planes. Realism above all, and red-blue balance must not interfere with that. Regarding your "anyone reasonable" comment, I think many more people would agree with me than you.

+1

 

 

!!!

[TAW_Blaze]

Good luck with your realism. If they implemented that AMRAAM model alone you would either have to fly the F-15 or the F-15. There wouldn't be any more options.

 

The sad truth is that the more you know about DCS the more you understand how incredibly far it is from realism.

[USARStarkey]

The point is if you change the AMRAAM but you skip the others you're not making it more realistic, you're just creating bullshit.

 

 

 

Or you want it to be too real. This is a friggin game and as much as I want it to it's not getting much closer to anything realistic. Even the so called FULL REALISM A-10C has next to nothing to do with the real airframe. But people tend to forget this in their clickable barbie house.

 

 

 

Other than influencing radar operation and ECM (which does not exist in this game anyway) it doesn't do that much. Range is just a parameter to adjust you can do everything more or less the same it'll work just fine. You fire earlier or later, go defensive earlier or later, do X maneuver earlier later, it just doesn't matter.

 

 

 

Remind me again how many kills were scored in actual combat beyond 15nm. Not a lot eh? BVR is anything beyond 5nm or less, ingame you won't see anything outside 3nm unless you're fully zoomed in and know exactly where to look. There's exactly 1 element of BVR missing and it's the goddamn ECM. We're never getting that though.

 

 

So while I agree Blaze that 15nm is still BVR, and that there are many more kills at this range than others, I have to say that it absolutely changes the ballgame when you scale down the ranges. It is simply false to imply that everything is proportional. Note, Im not quoting just your post here, but statements made all over the forums about this being relatively proportional so dont think im going after just you here, Im going after this general idea.

 

When you reduce the effective kill range of the missiles in half, or whatever it is, you change everything because nothing else is proportional to that changes in BVR. we ar still flying at the same speeds etc. So instead of a airplane having to dodge a gauntlet that starts 20-50 miles out where there is a very good chance of dying if you screw up, he now only has to do this for a third of that distance or less. Right now below 20K at co alt and medium speed, 8nm is about where the 120 and others start to get somewhat effective. This means that every tactic designed to avoid BVR fights is more effective. Therefore, planes whose main strenght is WVR (like the flanker....) have a much better chance of negating their inferiority in BVR and closing for the use of their off-boresight missiles. Take for example the notch. As you and I have discussed before, if a smart flanker pilot stays low(especially with mountains) he can try to constantly notch to slowly inch closer until he is under his target and he pops up for a close range kill(or ET shot). Lets Paint a picture of things

 

Features missing from Eagles that result in relative realism imbalance compared to IRL:

 

1. No Eagle data link

 

2. No inertial guidance after lock lost.

 

3. Missing radar features of APG-63 make tactics like notching or ducking behind mountains far more effetive

 

4. Across the board BVR missile ineffectiveness. Reducing effective range.

 

What this ends up meaning is that a hostile opponent is under essentially no threat until he is about 9-20nm depending of the geometry of the engagement. If he is trying to hide down low, he only has to effectively notch perhaps once or twice to get under the enemy radar assuming the eagle is adjusting flight path to constantly require. (especially since he doesnt have to fear continued detection via AWACS or a wingman on datalink) If they are both low and no notch is occuring, then can still close much closer before any effective shooting begins. Essentially, the window of opportunity for the BVR person is much smaller than in IRL, meaning that the WVR person has a much higher chance of closing. I end up in dogfights because of this all the time. I have seen people dodge multiple missiles as close as 5nm. And this all gets quite irritating when you think about how if they ever fix the visbility in this game to a reasonable level, WVR will get pushed out to about 7nm.

[USARStarkey]

Good luck with your realism. If they implemented that AMRAAM model alone you would either have to fly the F-15 or the F-15. There wouldn't be any more options.

 

The sad truth is that the more you know about DCS the more you understand how incredibly far it is from realism.

 

I agree with you completely here. But if they change all the missiles I still think this would be DCS F-15 more or less.