Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[SDsc0rch]

i can live with the ground clutter

 

that makes sense

 

 

chaff though - old missiles SHOULD be susceptible - modern missiles should have more and more resistance to countermeasures

[D4n]

What do I read? R-77 less range than AIM-120C ? Where do you get that information from???

[GGTharos]

What do I read? R-77 less range than AIM-120C ? Where do you get that information from???

 

Real life. Even AIM-120A can out range it. Heavier missile, more drag, smaller propellant ratio. There no magic here, max range will be less.

[SDsc0rch]

^^this

[ShuRugal]

i can live with the ground clutter

 

that makes sense

 

 

chaff though - old missiles SHOULD be susceptible - modern missiles should have more and more resistance to countermeasures

 

depending on the circumstances... When I'm under 10km from an SU-25, the skin return from the SU-25 should be stronger than the return from chaff, especially when closing at a head-on aspect, since he will be between my radar and the chaff he just dumped. When i'm WVR, my STT cone shouldn't even light up his chaff for longer than a fraction of a second, since chaff tends to stay where it it dumped (low momentum, extremely high drag)

[Shepski]

Without reading the whole list my observations are as follows:

Hey Goran!

 

I just got back into this now that the Flanker has had some real attention. Other than autopilot wobbliness and some pitch anomalies our beloved Flanker is most excellent. I just flew a mission in the "Fortress Mozdok" campaign and in one sortie downed 4 F-16s. 3 with ERs and 1 with an Archer. I always wait for RTR to launch and they seemed to be ok.

 

The Flanker cockpit, external model, and the sounds are amazing! I also got the Mig-21 which is a real masterpiece but needs some big engine sound improvements.

 

It's nice to be flying again!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[tintifaxl]

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.

 

You're not alone. I have the same problem. :pilotfly:

[Lino_Germany]

What do I read? R-77 less range than AIM-120C ? Where do you get that information from???

 

Just take a look at the telemetry of both missiles:

 

Air-to-Air Missile Telemetry.zip

 

Keep in mind, as GGTharos said and very clear mentioned in the guide, that this data comes directly from the sim. The performance can vary by the real missile.

 

The MiG-29S is the only non-KI fighter yet in DCW that can handle the R-77. Since the MiG-29 is the least recognized platform in DCSW (by the developer), the R-77 has also not much updates received in the past.

 

BTW: Where did you get the Information from, that the R-77 has a greater RMAX than the AIM-120C? I thought this information is classified...

Edited January 11, 2015 by Lino_Germany

[ralfidude]

This is the main reason why we fly with Scats missile mod.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806

 

I no longer have to pray to the fighter jet gods to make sure my missile even gets semi close to hitting its target.

 

The current missiles in DCS are just garbage... We would love to use HOJ mode... but you know... no workie workie.... for like... ever

[tintifaxl]

Thanks for the pointer, rafidude. Will restart the campaign with this mod and see what happens to my ER-27s.

[Falcon_S]

This is the main reason why we fly with Scats missile mod...

 

Integrity check? Which server?

[Falcon_S]

One more of the problems (maybe main problem) and we don`t talk about it is the R27ER speed.

 

Many sources say max speed is 4.5 mach for R27ER. That make sense because many sources say this too:

Пуск Р-27 возможен по целям со скоростями до 3500 км/ч, маневрирующим с перегрузкой 8д на высотах от 20 м с максимальным превышением или принижением относительно истребителя до 10 км.

That mean R27ER LA is possible for targets up to 3500 km/h (''...целям со скоростями до 3500 км/ч'') - this is not R27ER max speed but in DCS it is (+- some hundred) around 3500km/h.

 

ER can`t achieve 4.5M in DCS! - Why?

[GGTharos]

It's not classified if you know where to look, but if all you read is Wikipedia and forum posts, you might get the wrong idea. Propellant mass is available for both missiles, as is their gross weight. From there on you can make a very quick ballpark estimate of final speed in vacuum, or go on to do aerodynamics math to get an even more accurate answer.

[Ironhand]

Goran, Mark! It's been a long time. Just recently back myself.

 

 

Rich

[Trailer]

I'm mainly a solo simmer, but I recently substituted the stock missile parameters with the parameters done by Scats, and I have to say I am very happy with the results. The ranges are realistic (for a sim) and the guidance seems to be on the "correct for a flight sim" path.

 

Granted, I don't fly MP anymore with this profile as it would be flagged, but flying MP is only fun when the missiles aren't a complete travesty, so it's not a difficult decision to fly solo instead.

Edited January 11, 2015 by Trailer

[OB1]

I did some testing as there is mention of missile speed here. I was thinking absolutely best scenario.

 

Setup:

Almost clean Su-27 with only 1xR-27 and 1xR-27ER. Aircraft ~30% fuel.

Altitude of ~12000 @ ~Mach 2.5

 

Missile findings:

No target, using override therefor no maneuvering

R-27 reached a max of Mach 4.38

R-27ER reached a max of Mach 5.46

 

TackView track below.

 

Su-27 Behavior findings:

 

During this test I found some strange behavior with the 27. Return to level flight auto pilot was engaged, when pressing the trigger with or without override enabled the plane would pitch up slightly.

Secondly after I fired the missiles I started to pitch down, not aggressively as you can see on the track however both engines flamed out about 1-2 seconds after I started pitching down at -1.3g, I checked and there was fuel remaining. Engines re-lit on the way down.

Tacview-20150112-000313.txt.zip

[Falcon_S]

=238.lbae= Serbian V.F. Squadron DCS Server join to public testing IASGATG DCS Missile Mod. We install it on server.

 

Tacview recording is allowed.

 

Anyone who want join us to testing, download mod from here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806

 

Integrity Check for missliles_data.lua before entering on server - Must be same as in MOD!!!

 

S!

[OB1]

Another test.

 

Simple test how effective chaff is against the R-27ER

 

Setting:

 

non-maneuvering target drone (F-15) dumping chaff moving away, skewed trajectory.

 

Test findings:

 

chaff is effective.

achieved a kill on the drone only because the missile entered the chaff corridor and followed it up to the drone.

 

To my limited knowledge and understanding they actually perform these done tests, and from what I have read about them they almost always successful because a missile is usually smart enough to defeat a non-maneuvering target especially with the help of the data link.

 

Also maybe someone can shed a bit more light on this but how big is the radar beam in STT mode. If a missile does lock onto chaff as soon as the radar beam moves outside the scope of the chaff as it is still tracking the target wouldn't the chaff that the missile is tracking stop reflecting and the missile would then re-acquire a new reflected source ?

 

TackView attached.

Tacview-20150112-014201.txt.zip

[IASGATG]

Countermeasures are modeled as a dice roll vs angle to the target and seeker head type. Closer to the notch the more effective.

[BrzI]

I always wait for RTR to launch and they seemed to be ok.

 

Hi Mark and Rich,

 

good to hear from other old-timers....hey, is it 20 years now from the Windows 95 Su-27 ? Man, we ARE old :)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-27_Flanker_%28video_game%29

 

Yep, reflew mission 1 of the Ultimate Argument Campaign a couple of times. Waiting for RTR queue improves R-27ER efficiency significantly.

 

My problem is that I drift in and out of FC3. I simply cannot fly anything other then the Su-27 but am still waiting for the SMT version (or whatever multi-platform version we will eventually end up getting).

 

That means I sometimes forget some of the niceties associated with the Flanker - which compounded with occasional changes in missile behaviour forces me to re-learn some things.:book::book::book:

 

One thing I really miss is a trim AXIS rather than trim buttons. Otherwise she really looks good.

 

Thanks for chiming in. Happy New Year to both of you.

Edited January 12, 2015 by BrzI

[Dr_Arrow]

Hi Mark and Rich,

 

good to hear from other old-timers....hey, is it 20 years now from the Windows 95 Su-27 ? Man, we ARE old :)

 

Yep, reflew mission 1 of the Ultimate Argument Campaign a couple of times. Waiting for RTR queue improves R-27ER efficiency significantly.

 

My problem is that I drift in and out of FC3. I simply cannot fly anything other then the Su-27 but am still waiting for the SMT version (or whatever multi-platform version we will eventually end up getting).

 

That means I sometimes forget some of the niceties associated with the Flanker - which compounded with occasional changes in missile behaviour forces me to re-learn some things.:book::book::book:

 

One thing I really miss is a trim AXIS rather than trim buttons. Otherwise she really looks good.

 

Thanks for chiming in. Happy New Year to both of you.

 

Well, the real aircraft does not have trim axis and it is dangerous for high performance aircraft, just imagine moving axis trim to full aft/down at Mach 1.5, or vibrations moving the trim wheel in real aircraft, moving the trim wheel under G, etc...moreover you would have to move the trim wheel very very little during very high speeds. Well there is a bunch of reasons it is this way in RL aircraft and such trim is also the best solution for jet fighter aircraft.

[GGTharos]

To my limited knowledge and understanding they actually perform these done tests, and from what I have read about them they almost always successful because a missile is usually smart enough to defeat a non-maneuvering target especially with the help of the data link.

 

For which missile? The logic of what the R-27 does with its data-link data isn't too well known. But I'll point out that what's not modeled in game is that the chaff can walk the fighter's radar right off target, too.

 

There are studies at to effectiveness of counter-measures, and they show that if you get the circumstances exactly right, counter-measure success can be 100% or 0%, consistently. That stuff isn't really modeled, and probably never will be (a small subset is modeled though).

 

Like IASGATG said, it's a die roll modified by aspect, CM signal vs. target signal and look down/look up.

 

Also maybe someone can shed a bit more light on this but how big is the radar beam in STT mode. If a missile does lock onto chaff as soon as the radar beam moves outside the scope of the chaff as it is still tracking the target wouldn't the chaff that the missile is tracking stop reflecting and the missile would then re-acquire a new reflected source ?

 

Fighter radar beams tend to be 1.5-2 degrees wide. They also have side-lobes, but really what you're seeing is an artifact of the die roll.

[OB1]

But I'll point out that what's not modeled in game is that the chaff can walk the fighter's radar right off target, too.

 

That would be very cool if modeled and the die roll mechanic abolished.

[GGTharos]

And how/why would it be abolished?

 

There's all kinds of CMs, even chaff isn't 'just chaff' - there are ways to deploy it that make it more effective, or less. In-game, too. Various radar sets deal with it in different (yet similar :) ) ways. How will you simulate all of this, or more to the point - how will you simulate who does what? To be more clear, where will you get the information from?

 

Even two PD radar sets using doppler shift to discriminate chaff won't necessarily have the same success for a given set of circumstances.

 

In general the 'die roll' is a reasonable way to represent things - what other alternative would you propose? The fighter radar walking off target would pretty much end up being a die roll as well.

 

That would be very cool if modeled and the die roll mechanic abolished.

[OB1]

And how/why would it be abolished?

 

There's all kinds of CMs, even chaff isn't 'just chaff' - there are ways to deploy it that make it more effective, or less. In-game, too. Various radar sets deal with it in different (yet similar :) ) ways. How will you simulate all of this, or more to the point - how will you simulate who does what? To be more clear, where will you get the information from?

 

Even two PD radar sets using doppler shift to discriminate chaff won't necessarily have the same success for a given set of circumstances.

 

In general the 'die roll' is a reasonable way to represent things - what other alternative would you propose? The fighter radar walking off target would pretty much end up being a die roll as well.

 

I'm sure they could devise a logic that would consider as many variables as possible, at least the simple variables.

 

Let me spin some BS:

 

Example - object spacial position such that chaff caught between attacker and target is modeled as an object that can influence radar such that it can appear on radar.

Just spinning ideas here but also you could have SARH missiles to guide on targets that can only be possible, such that if chaff is not in a radar beam its not a target to be considered.

Chaff could be modeled better such that it has density and dispersion values that decline and increase respectively at a rate determined by the speed at which they were deployed. That logic then could further be incorporated in radar operations where in conjunction to its spatial position could mask a tracked target given the values add up enough to blind the radar...

 

Still is a die roll when you get down to it but they could make it such a complex die roll that would make it seem more realistic.

 

I suppose basically what I am saying is that they need to add more elements and possibilities to the die roll or before the die roll. It needs to go through an equation before a probability factor can be considered on a die roll.