Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[Radbes]

The F-15C is part of the Flaming Cliffs series of aircrafts, wich are simplified versions, it is not ment to be a study sim like the other modules. Therefore, alot of things are not like they are in real life on these aircrafts that are part of the Flaming Cliffs.

[IASGATG]

I saw my nephew playing game F-15C and I decided to play and noticed some errors. when I said I had some errors my nephew begged me to send the request for correction. child...

 

OK let's go

 

1° it is impossible select the other pages of the datalink , I searched the configuration of controls and did not find the option to change the page.

 

2° AMRRAM 120 / C does not function as in real life

 

In real life AMRRAM 120 / C can be launched with or without assistance of datalink, If the target is within its maximum range 42 NM

 

AMRRAM 120 / C when released activates its seeker for any reason whatsoever , it will ignore the datalink , you should confirm the target before launch to avoid friendly fire. only some models follows the trail AIM7 AIM120D

 

AMRRAM 120 / C can also completely defeat low capability jammers.

 

AMRRAM 120 C can also completely defeat high capability jammers , when missile approximately 31 NM , jammers becomes the trail , the jammers transmitter becomes target

 

In gameF-15C when datalink ignored or disabled , AMRRAM 120 / C don't follow its target he active only very close to the target ...

 

If I may, what are your sources on this information?

[GGTharos]

OK let's go

 

Ok, let's go indeed:

 

1° it is impossible select the other pages of the datalink , I searched the configuration of controls and did not find the option to change the page.

 

Correct, they are not modeled. There's no error.

 

2° AMRRAM 120 / C does not function as in real life

 

Oh, ok. How does it function in real life? Documents please?

 

In real life AMRRAM 120 / C can be launched with or without assistance of datalink, If the target is within its maximum range 42 NM

 

Sure, ok. Documents? Where'd you get a maximum range? Under what circumstances?

 

AMRRAM 120 / C when released activates its seeker for any reason whatsoever , it will ignore the datalink , you should confirm the target before launch to avoid friendly fire. only some models follows the trail AIM7 AIM120D

 

In game or in real life?

 

AMRRAM 120 / C can also completely defeat low capability jammers.

 

Proof?

 

AMRRAM 120 C can also completely defeat high capability jammers , when missile approximately 31 NM , jammers becomes the trail , the jammers transmitter becomes target

 

Proof?

 

In gameF-15C when datalink ignored or disabled , AMRRAM 120 / C don't follow its target he active only very close to the target ...

 

Yep, the active radar's range is limited. Not an error.

[AFAlinebacker42]

SGAT... don't even, man.

[GGTharos]

It's a troll. First post with no clue and that name ;)

[will-]

disregarding all the things that are wrong w/ missiles at the moment. But when watching the flight model of say the 120 would the AFM of the missile help at all in the sim? currently they do some chaotic things when flying towards targets.

[*Rage*]

The missiles are already AFM.

[will-]

The missiles are already AFM.

 

 

@.@

[=Mac=]

If the 120 and the 77 are modeled correctly, the A2A scenarios in DCS World would be quite a bit different and relatively boring. De-naturing these weapons helps make the simulator a bit more "engaging". However, I would agree with what people are attempting to say here: the 120 is hobbled a bit too much. What would be interesting is to see a clear comparison between the 120 and the 77 as DCS implements them at this time. (I don't have the time to do it myself.)

 

For the record, Wikipedia has a nice entry for the 120. I thought I'd share some of the text here:

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM

 

 

range

• AIM-120A/B: 55–75 km (30–40 nmi)

• AIM-120C-5: >105 km (>57 nmi)

• AIM-120D (C-8): >180 km (>97 nmi)

 

 

The kill probability (Pk) is determined by several factors, including aspect (head-on interception, side-on or tail-chase), altitude, the speed of the missile and the target, and how hard the target can turn. Typically, if the missile has sufficient energy during the terminal phase, which comes from being launched at close range to the target from an aircraft with an altitude and speed advantage, it will have a good chance of success. This chance drops as the missile is fired at longer ranges as it runs out of overtake speed at long ranges, and if the target can force the missile to turn it might bleed off enough speed that it can no longer chase the target. Operationally, the missile, which was designed for beyond visual range combat, has a Pk of 46% when fired at targets beyond visual range (13 missiles for 6 kills). In addition, the targets lacked missile warning systems, were not maneuvering, and were not attempting to engage the fighter that fired the AMRAAM. One of the targets was a US Army Blackhawk helicopter.

 

This leads to two main engagement scenarios. If the target is not armed with any medium or long-range fire-and-forget weapons, the attacking aircraft need only get close enough to the target and launch the AMRAAM. In these scenarios, the AMRAAM has a high chance of hitting, especially against low-maneuverability targets. The launch distance depends upon whether the target is heading towards or away from the firing aircraft. In a head-on engagement, the missile can be launched at longer range, since the range will be closing fast. In this situation, even if the target turns around, it is unlikely it can speed up and fly away fast enough to avoid being overtaken and hit by the missile (as long as the missile is not released too early). It is also unlikely the enemy can outmaneuver the missile since the closure rate will be so great. In a tail-on engagement, the firing aircraft might have to close to between one-half and one-quarter maximum range (or maybe even closer for a very fast target) in order to give the missile sufficient energy to overtake the targets.

 

If the targets are armed with missiles, the fire-and-forget nature of the AMRAAM is valuable, enabling the launching aircraft to fire missiles at the target and subsequently take defensive actions. Even if the targets have longer-range semiactive radar homing (SARH) missiles, they will have to chase the launching aircraft in order for the missiles to track them, effectively flying right into the AMRAAM. If the target aircraft fires missiles and then turns and runs away, those missiles will not be able to hit. Of course, if the target aircraft have long range missiles, even if they are not fire-and-forget, the fact that they force the launching aircraft to turn and run reduces the kill probability, since it is possible that without the mid-course updates the missiles will not find the target aircraft. However the chance of success is still good and compared to the relative impunity the launching aircraft enjoy, this gives the AMRAAM-equipped aircraft a decisive edge. If one or more missiles fail to hit, the AMRAAM-equipped aircraft can turn and re-engage, although they will be at a disadvantage compared to the chasing aircraft due to the speed they lose in the turn, and would have to be careful that they are not being tracked with SARH missiles.

 

The other main engagement scenario is against other aircraft with fire-and-forget missiles like the Vympel R-77 (NATO AA-12 "Adder") – perhaps MiG-29s, Su-27s or similar. In this case engagement is very much down to teamwork and could be described as "a game of chicken." Both flights of aircraft can fire their missiles at each other beyond visual range (BVR), but then face the problem that if they continue to track the target aircraft in order to provide mid-course updates for the missile's flight, they are also flying into their opponents' missiles. This assumes of course that all aircraft will detect each other.

[D4n]

I'm quite sure 120's and 77's active seeker activates before your opponents missile is close enough to you to hit your aircraft...

[Beach07]

Hi everyone,

 

This is an extremely long thread, so please forgive me for not going through it all to find an answer to this question. I hear a lot of different arguments in multiplayer on the 120B and C as far as what is modeled in DCS.

 

Some say the 120B is slower but more maneuverable and has a slightly shorter range, while the 120C is faster but less maneuverable and slightly longer range. Others say it's complete rubbish and to just stick with 120Cs. I know the missiles in DCS aren't accurate to real-life for balancing reasons, but I was wondering, is this actually modeled in the game? Should I just stick to 120Cs? Or is a loadout of both a better decision because it is actually modeled?

[IASGATG]

Hi everyone,

 

This is an extremely long thread, so please forgive me for not going through it all to find an answer to this question. I hear a lot of different arguments in multiplayer on the 120B and C as far as what is modeled in DCS.

 

Some say the 120B is slower but more maneuverable and has a slightly shorter range, while the 120C is faster but less maneuverable and slightly longer range. Others say it's complete rubbish and to just stick with 120Cs. I know the missiles in DCS aren't accurate to real-life for balancing reasons, but I was wondering, is this actually modeled in the game? Should I just stick to 120Cs? Or is a loadout of both a better decision because it is actually modeled?

 

The missiles aren't accurate not due to balance reasons but due to a debate over missile engagement theory, there is a long thread elsewhere about this.

 

To answer your question, yes the missiles are modeled different and the B is slightly slower (short ranged) and more maneuverable than the C, but the difference in maneuverability is minor where as the loss in speed is significant enough to completely outweigh it, hence the "Just stick with Charlies"

[Beach07]

To answer your question, yes the missiles are modeled different and the B is slightly slower (short ranged) and more maneuverable than the C, but the difference in maneuverability is minor where as the loss in speed is significant enough to completely outweigh it, hence the "Just stick with Charlies"

 

Ah, I see. Thanks!

[Falcon_S]

Missile circus continues... DCS becomes a twilight zone

 

Can someone explain to me WHY self-destruction? Maybe they are afraid of the clouds?

 

Please watch ACMI from 10:00:30.

self-destruction.rar

[Lino_Germany]

I´ve made an (partly translated) excerpt from the german guide "Einsatz der Luft-Luft Lenkflugkörper" by Lino_Germany and MontyPython76:

 

Air-to-Air Missile Performance in DCS World Version 1.0.pdf

 

The complete guide is downloadable here:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=134727

 

 

This may bring some light into the darkness.

 

[Falcon_S]

Judging by the silence that seems to be normal.

[JNASova]

DCS is quite good. The point is to fit within the existing :music_whistling:

[*Rage*]

Not normal. Just no change yet. ED have done a great job with missile AFM. They need to work on guidance next.

[Exorcet]

At this point it should be clear that the sim is being done in layers. EDGE is near, that is the focus now. I really wouldn't expect much outside of EDGE. The devs know there are issues, but they need time to fix them.

[ShuRugal]

At this point it should be clear that the sim is being done in layers. EDGE is near, that is the focus now. I really wouldn't expect much outside of EDGE. The devs know there are issues, but they need time to fix them.

 

I don't exepect much inside of EDGE either. They've been on the cusp of release since 2011.

 

I just want my missiles to work. I've flown the first mission of the new campaign four times now, and killed a total of two frogfoots.... with 40 missiles expended, all from well inside NEZ. All the AI has to do is drop chaff and flare (which they do instantly) and the missiles desperately evade their targets.

[will-]

Not normal. Just no change yet. ED have done a great job with missile AFM. They need to work on guidance next.

 

 

I've when i watch a 120 going from data link to its active radar the missile will just pitch its nose around violently imo changing directions? pressing F6 watching them.

[MNEFSecutor]

This problem aroud the air-air missiles takes too long and it is very frustrating

Edited January 10, 2015 by =MNEF=Secutor

[Rikus]

This problem aroud the air-air missiles takes too long and it is very frustrating

 

Totally agree

[BrzI]

Without reading the whole list my observations are as follows:

 

Su-27 with R27ER vs 4 SU25 excellents .... no hits at ALL in 20 attempts

Su-27 with R27R vs 4 SU25 excellents 2 hits from 6 attempts

Su-27 with R27 vs 4 SU25 excellents 2 hits from 6 attempts

 

And I really waited to get in range.

 

I spent money on the SU-27 campaign but cannot get past the 4 Su25s because my R27ERs are useless.

Guess I could switch to R27Rs or T77s...but I should not have to.

 

Needs work....Please fix ASAP.

 

Thanks

[*Rage*]

1) Over susceptibility to chaff.

2) Over susceptibility to ground clutter.