Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

The air combat and tactics also are not based on working switches either... they are based on what you need to know to defeat the radar that is targeting you, to get into firing position and to know what conditions are good for you firing that missile... this is what most people want and to get this you need to model those laws that govern how radar and missiles work... not switches

I agree.

I would like to add that a 1-1 BVR in real life is a no go. Simply because all bvr missiles will probably be wasted. BVR fights are more used between 2-2, 2-3, 3-4 flight groups and so on, because strategy and tactics get into play, then, if ALL parts are so well trained, VR fights are coming next. But then again after a good BVR fight, a 4-4 will end up in 2-3 or 1-2 dogfight so...

Anyway you all get my point, wich is 1-1 BVR is a no go IRL, BUT in our public servers 99% of the fights take place that way.

:doh:

So i am in my FC3 SU-33 firing an R-27ER at target X from parameters Y

Now, i am in DCS SU-27SM firing an R-27ER at the same target X whit the same parameters Y

 

Both missiles should behave EXACTLY the same, cause there both an R-27ER.

Or would it be ok for the R-27ER launched from the DCS SU-27SM have 3 times better tracking and 10 km less range compared to the one launched by the FC3 SU-33 ?????

Sure hope not.

I am not a weapons expert, but I think the missile with better radar guidance (launch platform radar) should track better

(I understand ALL of you in this thread) I just proposed an equal multilayer arcade until we get higher fidelity launch platforms, thats all.

EDIT:

Kuki and and others, please dnt get me wrong, missile simulation is an enormous and great effort, and it is done, and it is here and it will stay.

I ll say it this way. You have an old rifle from 1900. You develop a new bullet that is capable of many things like taking down a tank or whatever, but the problem is that you cannot aim the boolet corectly on the target because your old 1900 rifle cant coop with the new technology. I dont say, destroy the new developed bullet. I say keep it safe (dnt fire it through the old rifle) until you get the proper rifle to fire it from. And I dnt mean only a DCS fighter, I mean all other things like radars, chaffs etc

why is it so difficult to bring a ''sence'' of equality to the missiles that we use at the moment, and when other things are modelled, like radars, high fidelity lunch platforms ( SU27-F18 ), then ED can show off their simulation programming abilities.

Because equality is not desired. Because there's enough fidelity to modle certain differences.

At the moment, AtoA fights are done between airframes of VERY low fidelity (FC3).

Their fidelity is pretty good as far as the practice of air to air combat is concerned.

Why bring high fidelity weapons (which will bring confusion and frustration) with low fidelity lunch platforms (no radars, half working TWS for Russian planes, low fidelity radars in general, broken EOS).

Because they force realistic reactions to weapon fires.

All the talk is about online AtoA which at the moment is just an online airquake and nothing more.

And it will still be airquake when DCS allthecoolfightersintheworldwithclickpitsandotherrealisticstuff are modeled. :)

Simulating a subsystem in high standards without simulating the rest of the system is not only useless but will bring problems like what we have.

The problems are there because a subsystem of a subsystem is not correctly simulated.

I tried to explain this several times, but no one is getting it I guess ...

The countermeasure rejection algorithm works in a very specific way (none of which is what Kuky, or anyone else seems to think it is).

This is why you can't go messing around with RCS' of playable aircraft. All CM rejection is tuned stochastically to work with a certain RCS, and this is

a) Not realistic

b) Not fixable with data tweaks

c) Not capable of representing reality beyond a very very narrow narrow scope, and even then ...

Finally, c) it's a completely ridiculous tangent to the main issue of missiles not tracking, and all the proposed ideas based on aircraft RCS are the wrong way of going about to fix things.

You've all gone off on a tangent whose current implementation you don't understand, and thus whose implications you do not understand.

The devs tuned things in a specific way for a specific reason. I've explained it to you. If you still can't get what's being said, I don't know what to say, except sit down, and don't touch stuff. Let the peeps who know what they're doing do this, and when and if it's changed, you'll see it in a Wags Friday update.

I thought as yours Kuky that RCS differences already were introduced where mig-29/F-16/mig-21 have smaller RCS then F-15/Su-27/F-4. Is that not the case GG?

.Their fidelity is pretty good as far as the practice of air to air combat is concerned.

.Because they force realistic reactions to weapon fires.

.And it will still be airquake when DCS allthecoolfightersintheworldwithclickpitsandotherrealisticstuff are modeled. :)

The problems are there because a subsystem of a subsystem is not correctly simulated.

AGREE and +1000

Because equality is not desired. Because there's enough fidelity to modle certain differences.

Disagree here, because we are talking about online airquake with FC planes, a simple online competition game, and not a military simulation (for military).

If ED use this game as as military sim advertisement (which I think they do) , then just have to SAY it, and I go back in my dirty cave, and from now on I ll fly the f15 spamraam king (just kidding) in order to fulfil my dirty super fighter pilot desires:smilewink:

EDIT: White flag is up for me... Ill fly the frog or the pig from now on :)

Disagree here, because we are talking about online airquake with FC planes, a simple online competition game, and not a military simulation (for military).

Then you can play HAWX, if your desire for fidelity is zero fidelity - that's the real argument here. Just because it's airquake doesn't mean the individual air to air part can't be realistic. :)

If ED use this game as as military sim advertisement (which I think they do) , then just have to SAY it, and I go back in my dirty cave, and from now on I ll fly the f15 spamraam king (just kidding) in order to fulfil my dirty super fighter pilot desires:smilewink:

It's a simulator. Simulation fidelity is always limited, some more, some less. If you don't want a simulator, there are air combat games for that. If you want a simulator, then it follows that all the possible fidelity is wrought out of it; as long as you can have a shooter and target have realistic actions and reactions to defend against weapons etc. you're doing great.

If you want to make planes that aren't equal be equal, then you're back to not wanting a simulator.

Equality is not desired. If you want an equal fight, put the same plane in for everyone with the same payload, and that's that. If you want to fly your favorite plane and the other guy to fly his favorite plane in a simulator, you have got to be asking for dissimilar air combat, and if you aren't, I hate to say it but ... arcade games are what you're looking for.

(Note the 'you' here is not actually directed at you specifically)

Well don't call FC3 fidelity aircraft systems/switches modeling reason not to model/improve missiles and radar etc. While flipping switches is good in its own way radar will not work any different if you need to flip 10 switches to get it setup, and having this done for you in FC3 fidelity... modelling switches to their full real life counterpart will not make any difference if radar (and by this I don't mean different modes of it) is modeled to good extend of physics behind how it operates, and to model this you don't need cockpit full of working switches.

 

The air combat and tactics also are not based on working switches either... they are based on what you need to know to defeat the radar that is targeting you, to get into firing position and to know what conditions are good for you firing that missile... this is what most people want and to get this you need to model those laws that govern how radar and missiles work... not switches

I could not have said it better.

Understood.

But this

Then you can play HAWX

please take it back :cry:

its more than offencive to me:matrix:

Hehe, very well then, I take it back :)

I've read back like 10 pages. Do I get it right that Kuky tries to change RCS of an aircraft after chaff are dropped?

Anyway, please don't touch RCS. Its one thing that (if nothing else, then only) feels realistic. Big aircraft, big distance. small aircraft, small distance. Quite simple. E.G.: Gripens vs F-15s IRL BVR, they detected each other at similar distances. I don't think I have to tell which is the bigger aicraft, and which one has a bigger antennae :)

Oh and please don't consider RAM coating and other fancy high-tech stuff, it will lead to a "how can I polish my Eagle better to kill more Fulcrums" thing... Next time you'll argue about why not get Eagles the AESA radar. Why not just stay with good old regular aircraft properties? I mean, if there's RAM coating on F-15/16 aircrafts, I bet my 2 cents that 95% of the aircrafts don't have them...

About Chaffs, it should not reduce target RCS relatively, it should give false echoes. And some type of ECM also gets false echoes. False contacts in DCS are not present, - don't get me wrong, keep up the good work, but - you guys should work on this sooner than how chaffs affecting radar track. Do you see it anytime that false contacts / noise can be present in game? (asking only because chaff, which you are talking about here, first of all are making false echoes)

I've read back like 10 pages. Do I get it right that Kuky tries to change RCS of an aircraft after chaff are dropped?

no, that's not what I am trying to change, RCS of an aircraft is RCS of an aircraft, it doesn't change when chaff is dropped or not... but they are not the same for all aircraft (RCS of an aircraft) and RCS does affect how far it can be detected (for other things that affect this also - are constant). ie 2 aircrafts of different RCS but with same radar power and the aircraft with higher RCS will be detected sooner (or at greater distance)... the difference is not linear though (ie 2x the RCS does not mean 2x the distance at which its detected)

Big aircraft, big distance. small aircraft, small distance. Quite simple. E.G.: Gripens vs F-15s IRL BVR[...]

Don't know why people associate size with RCS, there's numerous examples against this, including the gripen wonder why it will be armed with the meteor? There's a reason for it. ;)

And no the gripen would never out detect an F-15, not a chance in hell.

Don't know why people associate size with RCS, there's numerous examples against this, including the gripen wonder why it will be armed with the meteor? There's a reason for it. ;)

 

And no the gripen would never out detect an F-15, not a chance in hell.

Its because F-15 has bigger Radar, have nothing to do with RCS. But F-15C have no data link compared to Jas-39 and no Meteor missiles.

I would say Jas-39 is a good match to any block F-16.

Tek if your looking for an argument you need to at least pretend to know what your talking about. :D

Oh and please don't consider RAM coating and other fancy high-tech stuff, it will lead to a "how can I polish my Eagle better to kill more Fulcrums" thing... Next time you'll argue about why not get Eagles the AESA radar. Why not just stay with good old regular aircraft properties? I mean, if there's RAM coating on F-15/16 aircrafts, I bet my 2 cents that 95% of the aircrafts don't have them...

Nobody said anything the likes of this calm down.

As i understand it, F-15/Su-27 are flying with some sort of coating in FC3 since apparently Su-27/F-15 have same RCS as Mig-29/F-16/Mig-21?

Did we not have this implemented in FC2? Im sure that the Mig-29 was harder to pick up on radar then Su-27. The ranges was different at least on detection of a smaller target. I would assume it still the same?

Hello guys.

Very interesting discussion.Since we are talking about missiles,I would like to ask one question.

In missiles_data.lua sript I found this value for this missiles kill distance:

R 27 ER = 11

R 77 = 15

Aim 7 = 12

AIM 120C/B = 15

SAM S300 = 20

Why aim 120C/B or R-77 have biger kill distance than R 27ER or AIM7 when R 27ER and AIM 7 hase much more explosive in warheads?Almost double.

Do you know what those values mean?

Can I ask you to explane?

I don't know either, and it appears Im not the only one. :D

I think these are probably proximity fuse distances

I don't know either, and it appears Im not the only one. :D

Keep that in your mind.

Hello guys.

Very interesting discussion.Since we are talking about missiles,I would like to ask one question.

In missiles_data.lua sript I found this value for this missiles kill distance:

R 27 ER = 11

R 77 = 15

Aim 7 = 12

AIM 120C/B = 15

SAM S300 = 20

Why aim 120C/B or R-77 have biger kill distance than R 27ER or AIM7 when R 27ER and AIM 7 hase much more explosive in warheads?Almost double.

It is probably like this to simulate the more advanced warheads in the ARH missiles.

Hello guys.

Very interesting discussion.Since we are talking about missiles,I would like to ask one question.

In missiles_data.lua sript I found this value for this missiles kill distance:

R 27 ER = 11

R 77 = 15 ( have not range, not worry )

Aim 7 = 12

AIM 120C/B = 15

SAM S300 = 20

Why aim 120C/B or R-77 have biger kill distance than R 27ER or AIM7 when R 27ER and AIM 7 hase much more explosive in warheads?Almost double.

AMAZING :D

If this is infact fuse radius (and not kill range, probably just bad english), then these numbers reflect adaptive warheads VS older warheads. I don't believe these numbers equate into radius of a sphere in meters IRL, they could be a way to reflect the effectiveness ingame, since you cannot emulate its inner workings then just increase the blast radius factor.

Those are prox fuses and are there for a reason. Someone said they are there to simulate the directional warheads (AIM120).

and nothing to worry about, an AIM120 blowing at 15 meters away from your airfram will bring only minor damage and nothing more ( From my tests, an aim will bring damage to a 27-33 only if it blows at less than 10m in the game.) Anything above that, you will just hear the missile detonation and no damage at all.