GGTharos Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 This adjustment was to SARH missiles more so than to ARH, though both were tuned. Expect better chaff rejection for ARH. [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
44th Eagle Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 This adjustment was to SARH missiles more so than to ARH, though both were tuned. Expect better chaff rejection for ARH. Ghost, I didnt know ARH rejection was going to be better...good news.
GGTharos Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 In COMPARISON to SARH, ARH chaff rejection will be much better depending on aspect etc. [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
nscode Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 Shouldn't this all go in missile effectivnes thread ;) Use THA powa of mooove post, mr. moderator :) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
D-Scythe Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 In COMPARISON to SARH, ARH chaff rejection will be much better depending on aspect etc. It doesn't matter. The basic problems are still there: chaff is most effective at low aspects and the seeker just goes blind if it gets beamed. Plus, there are no limitations to chaff in Lock On - the huge LOS rates it creates in the end-game are not modelled. If monopulse was truly modelled, PK would increase considerably in certain situations (notably in the no-escape zone, between 2 and 5 miles). So basically, radar missiles are modelled at their weakest and their countermeasures at their strongest.
Recommended Posts