Jump to content

Air-to-Air Missile Discussion


Shein

Recommended Posts

The hotfix has been out since this morning.

 

Rage made a test on Er-27 Chaff resistance in 1.2.5 before the hotfix. As I understand ED will have another one in a week where missiles chaff resistance might be fixed.

 

Some testing will be done when next hotfix is out and posted in here. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=103377&page=10

[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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You can play and accept this situation. Maybe you really dont care the main sence of this thread and what you try to do is detract from
What's the sense of this thread then? For the Red side to cry foul and say ED is purposely porking their missiles, when it's obvious both sides are having problems with missiles?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rage, I just noticed your "Real men support their missiles" sginature...LOL, awesome! :D

 

Hear that Pilotasso? :D

 

It used to be 'Real men Gunzo' but I felt I had to contemporise:)


Edited by ///Rage

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real deal is that only fools support missiles if it will doom them.

There are plenty of RL tactics utilizing cheapshots.

 

Sounds to me like jealousy :D

 

Forever and until his dying day the F15/ Spamraam protagonist:)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patch Update 1.2.5.15865

 

Chaff resistance has been altered. Some imrovement so most flights only 2 missile launches ~ 30-35k distance. Target chaffing. Lock maintained at all times. Target not in the notch/ground clutter etc..

 

5 tacviews (Sorry forgot to save tracks - can repeat if necessary)

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8foahw8vo9g23ld/-F6lRz37f0

 

Track 1 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 2 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 3 - 4 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 3 go for chaff (2 re-aquire after missguiding)

Track 4 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 5 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

 

12 missile launches.

5 track correctly

7 missguide for despite optimum conditions.

 

Ptrack now 0.42. Was previously .22

 

Overall some improvement but not to the required level. More than half of all missiles fired in otherwise ideal conditions (ineffective chaff deployment) still fail.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think chaff rejection is the problem. After observing aerial battles between AI i've noticed the only radar guided missiles that score a hit is the R-40 and the AIM-54C. Mainly because they have the thrust to keep going. Every other radar missile loses energy half way through their flight path and just sail to the ground. They definitely try to guide to a head on intercept with aircraft but they just don't have enough energy. Even when falling they don't pick up speed, or keep it, they just steadily lose it.

 

Most of the aircraft involved in the fight are at excellent skill level.

 

To add on to that, I've noticed a lot of IR-guided missiles exhibiting odd behavior - if they've gone ballistic, they'll just float to the ground at decelerating speeds, also a problem with the radar guided missiles.


Edited by NPOSuperhornet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the sense of this thread then? For the Red side to cry foul and say ED is purposely porking their missiles, when it's obvious both sides are having problems with missiles?

 

We have enough reasons to be like that. There are a lot of things against the russians fighters. Today I flight at night and the smoke of the russians missiles look like a reflector saying the F-15 ---" hey I am here you start dispense flares "--- EVEN IN NIGHT

 

Do you things guys now is better?? The R-27 is enough bad still when the F-15 leave the 120 in-bound go back and our R-27 all losses

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean 'look like a reflector'? Did you report a bug?

 

In any case, at night missile launches should be very visible.

[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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean 'look like a reflector'? Did you report a bug?

 

In any case, at night missile launches should be very visible.

 

You think of a trail of smoke or fire missiles?

“The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” — George Orwell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much has been done on Smokeless engines AIM120. But the high altitude marching engine always leaves a visible mark. When the Serbian pilot in 1999. RWR canceled, the pilot was visually observed traces AIM-120C and take anti-missile maneuver! Height was over 8 000m, the distance over 30km, and time is 12:30PM (27.3.1999.)

Russian missiles are very much visible and also AIM7.

“The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” — George Orwell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This missile is a short range R-60/73 launched at day. I speaking about a missile launched at 19:00 h. Anyway your user Location is " in front of a R-27ET ". At 19 or 20:00 h you will be happy to see a clearly and white R-27ET smoke, thats why you answer me so fast and in a special way :smartass:

 

By the way do not forget that if you flight at 7000 m with afterburner and I am 20 km away at your 2 a clock and low altitud, your probably do not see a R-27ET in front you because we cant find you easyly and blaaa blaaaa blaaa...

 

Please do not censure us when we speak about the missiles, sometimes we must add something about the sensors.

 

The neautrality is very important in the question you have before mentioned...

 

That works well enough against the inexperienced F-15 pilot. Being at 2 o'clock still means you'll likely be picked up on radar, or you would have temporarily gone radar on to IFF, (unless you like to team kill) thus queuing the F-15 where to look. A 29 on my tews any where gets a low scan first as thats where you'll find them 90% of the time, its the rare high ones that surprise me if they got within 20nm without me noticing. Beyond that I know now (the hard way) that ETs can track head-on at 12nm/22km, where typically I didn't worry about them until 10nm/18km. So I'm popping flares and out of burn against anything Russian within that range whether I've spotted the launch or not, and most of the time I'm looking for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

The Russian aircraft TWS and EOS issues are in our to-do list and are a high priority.

 

See notes: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=110335

 

Please keep this thread specifically focused on air to air missile behavior.

 

I kindly suggest that several of you review the forum rules here. In particular rule 1.10:

 

"1.10. - Product feedback and constructive criticism is encouraged when provided in a mature and courteous manner. However, feedback that is abusive, insulting or condescending is not welcome. Additionally, to bring up a particular issue repeatedly after it has already been acknowledged will be considered "trolling" - in such cases a warning will be issued to the author and the post will be removed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One additional item to the hot fix last week that was not noted:

 

Chaff has had is Radar Cross Section (RCS) reduced to a value of 10 sq.m to 3 sq.m. This is the same value as was in FC2. Currently, there are three levels of missile chaff rejection.

 

1. All SARH missiles.

2. All ARH missiles, except AIM-120C.

3. AIM-120C.

 

Target aspect also determines chaff rejection based on three basic scenarios: head to head, 3-9, and pursuit. In a head to head intercept for example, the missile has maximum chaff rejection.

 

This makes me happy!

But I never understood why chaff elicits better when SARH climbing and less when lowered in target (in Head on, no beaming situation)?!

“The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” — George Orwell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think chaff rejection is the problem. After observing aerial battles between AI i've noticed the only radar guided missiles that score a hit is the R-40 and the AIM-54C. Mainly because they have the thrust to keep going. Every other radar missile loses energy half way through their flight path and just sail to the ground. They definitely try to guide to a head on intercept with aircraft but they just don't have enough energy. Even when falling they don't pick up speed, or keep it, they just steadily lose it.

 

I think both are issues, though the bigger one for me is missile kinetic performance. I'd say that they are too draggy, but without data it's just a feeling so I'll go along with whatever ED does until I have data.

 

EDIT - should also add to this missile guidance is still "SFM" and that is a big issue. In particular, the AIM-120 has super degraded performance because of its loft. It drains itself of most of its speed when fired in a BVR shot despite that being its job. The loft isn't too complex, the missile flies up quickly, then at a predetermined range, it pulls down as hard as it can on the target. What is should do is pick a trajectory based on target range, speed, and altitude.

 

I've had some success lobbing unguided AMRAAM's at non maneuvering targets 40+ nm away since they don't loft when you do that.

 

To add on to that, I've noticed a lot of IR-guided missiles exhibiting odd behavior - if they've gone ballistic, they'll just float to the ground at decelerating speeds, also a problem with the radar guided missiles.
When ballistic, the missiles actually all try to maintain positive AoA. So when they're falling, they're at their max AoA and can't accelerate.

 

If you jettison a missile without launching it, it falls nose down and accelerates.


Edited by Exorcet

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With no thrust or forward movement how does a missile keep that angle? And i'm not exaggerating about the floating part, it really just drops straight down like a brick.

 

Well the thrust doesn't matter, missiles can maneuver without thrust, and I doubt that they have no forward motion, they'll have some left from their initial trajectory and possibly some from lift.

 

I've seen plenty of dead missiles with barely any speed in the sim, I wouldn't say any of them were floating or something strange like that though. It's most likely just because they try to keep AoA all the time. Try jettison your load from a F-15, then hit F6. The missiles will be accelerating downward.

 

You mean besides the fact they all (except AIM-54 and R-33) fall short?

 

I don't see these missiles often, but they probably act like the AIM-120, etc, when out of energy. Maybe it's not as noticeable because the AI firing range may be a little more conservative with them compared to other missiles.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not done in depth testing for a while, but it looks mostly the same. The R-73 has become pretty lethal with regards to turning ability though.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...