Jump to content

Air-to-Air Missile Discussion


Shein

Recommended Posts

That said, I'm not trying to say that the R-27 is a bad missile - just an old design.

 

You are not trying, you do in every post.

 

The same with Peru and Malasia, Vietnam and Venezuela. They all have the R-27 and export R-77. But not only that... USA have take two ukranian Su-27 to test his Radar sign ( ??... ) But if all the russian is old and the missiles are olddated, why going desperate to be sure if they can against the Flanker?

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@GGTharos

We have at least one person who works in that industry on the test team; he has good knowledge of these things on the Russian side.

 

Is that Snowden?:) If you've got the right man in the right place, be sure not to give accurate information. The reason is logical.

 

Sorry but that is not correct. The 120C5 has an operational range of 105km+.

 

It does not matter what you and I disagree on this one, but look at this picture. https://www.dropbox.com/s/e30w9khzi31asnt/AIM-120A.gif

This is AIM120A. It does not matter whether this is reliable. It does not matter whether this created a military expert or my grandmother. But clearly shows what the author describes.

My question: Do you have any of these charts for the missile used in FC that you think should be the way they are in FC? Charts for AIM-120C5, AIM-120B, AIM-7M, R-27R/ER, RVV-AE???


Edited by Ragnarok

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are not trying, you do in every post.

 

The same with Peru and Malasia, Vietnam and Venezuela. They all have the R-27 and export R-77. But not only that... USA have take two ukranian Su-27 to test his Radar sign ( ??... ) But if all the russian is old and the missiles are olddated, why going desperate to be sure if they can against the Flanker?

 

The Ukrainian flankers are de-militarized, their radars are long gone before it entered the US so they could be certified under the FAA. Also what each country has is what they can afford and you do get what you pay for. Its a question of priorities. Why buy the latest high tech weapon if the chances of using them are nearly zero for opponents that probably wont have anything better anyway.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ukrainian flankers are de-militarized, their radars are long gone before it entered the US so they could be certified under the FAA. Also what each country has is what they can afford and you do get what you pay for. Its a question of priorities. Why buy the latest high tech weapon if the chances of using them are nearly zero for opponents that probably wont have anything better anyway.

Cause it keeps the arms industry running which in turn makes for good politics?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't go into depth, but doing that would really break some other things as well. Missiles that don't lose lock are not desired, even temporarily.

 

You're not going to get a more realistic BVR setup. It'll just be less realistic, but from a different perspective. You instantly give advantage to every lawnmower out there, and that is not desired at all, especially since it squashes one of the major reasons for creating the new missile FM.

 

You see the trouble is, ER tracking is still deeply flawed. If, as you say it is an issue with CM code which is not easily resolved, yet at the same time ED will not raise chaff resistence temporarily to remedy the problem, than that leaves the red side with its primary BVR weapon a dud. Very unhappy players.

 

Im no coder. I know nothing about software development. But what do you propose is the answer? Lawnmowers already have WAFM to disadvantage them. I personally hate that style of play but I dont see how increasing chaff resistance will tip the balance in their favour. If anything it favours the look down situation.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But not only that... USA have take two ukranian Su-27 to test his Radar sign ( ??... ) But if all the russian is old and the missiles are olddated, why going desperate to be sure if they can against the Flanker?

 

The Ukrainian flankers are de-militarized, their radars are long gone before it entered the US so they could be certified under the FAA.

 

Pepin did not mean they wanted to test the radar, he meant they want to test radar signature :) (hint in red) because the US never went against the Flanker ;)

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pepin did not mean they wanted to test the radar, he meant they want to test radar signature :) (hint in red) because the US never went against the Flanker ;)

 

Yes you right. Thank to correct to me.

 

People if the aim-120 missile is really superior, then still they are not really sure what they could find in combat.

 

Looking how the russian testing the quality of their armament, the efficiense of their SAMs missiles and the kinds and quantity rockets made, plus they still have the R-27R available.

 

Just take a look how the russian show the R-27R in every setting. Guys we cant use the R-27R in game because this missile going slowly so fast while the Aim-7 look much faster in our game. We are forced to take the R-27ER even knowing the R-27R is lighter.


Edited by pepin1234

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would just like to say 1st, thank you for your service to all ED, military people that contribute to this game.

 

ED seems to have a lot of the facts about how these missles work, and with more people playing the game, we can always work to improve the realism in each plane, weapon system., etc.

 

Does anyone besides ED here have some real ballistics info that we can view?

 

Because to me what most are saying "Yes this seems true." of the 120b/c out ranging the er's, or the speed of 77,27-r out matching my AIM-7 at mach 2+ :x. But to me its just counter balance, and makes the game a challenge knowing "Oh red(migs) have EWR so they can datalink me if im in range. Completely making my AIM 120's usless.

 

But i would be interested in seeing some more detailed radar info, etc. I cannot wait for the f-18!^^

Intel i9-9900K 32GB DDR4, RTX 2080tiftw3, Windows 10, 1tb 970 M2, TM Warthog, 4k 144hz HDR g-sync.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I propose that this is fixed correctly, but again, this goes into things that I can't talk about.

 

When I have some time I will collect stats for aspect+distance vs. missiles decoyed, graph it, and present that graph along with some military chaff simulation docs to make my point - to the devs that is, not here. Then things will get a lot better and more interesting.

 

 

 

You see the trouble is, ER tracking is still deeply flawed. If, as you say it is an issue with CM code which is not easily resolved, yet at the same time ED will not raise chaff resistence temporarily to remedy the problem, than that leaves the red side with its primary BVR weapon a dud. Very unhappy players.

 

Im no coder. I know nothing about software development. But what do you propose is the answer? Lawnmowers already have WAFM to disadvantage them. I personally hate that style of play but I dont see how increasing chaff resistance will tip the balance in their favour. If anything it favours the look down situation.

[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

Sure, they may have tested the radar signature, but the reality is that these Su-27's belong to a private company who fly them as opposition for USAF/ANG/USN training. This is a fairly profitable business, and the US crews profit from being able to engage against an actual flanker instead of an aggressor F-16 or F-15.

 

Where do you see desperation here?

 

You are not trying, you do in every post.

 

The same with Peru and Malasia, Vietnam and Venezuela. They all have the R-27 and export R-77. But not only that... USA have take two ukranian Su-27 to test his Radar sign ( ??... ) But if all the russian is old and the missiles are olddated, why going desperate to be sure if they can against the Flanker?

[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

@GGTharos

 

Is that Snowden?:) If you've got the right man in the right place, be sure not to give accurate information. The reason is logical.

 

This is BS. The test team is full of real life subject matter experts. Sarcastic comments like this are useless and serve no purpose except to agitate.

 

 

It does not matter what you and I disagree on this one, but look at this picture. https://www.dropbox.com/s/e30w9khzi31asnt/AIM-120A.gif

This is AIM120A. It does not matter whether this is reliable. It does not matter whether this created a military expert or my grandmother. But clearly shows what the author describes.

 

I know this picture well - this is RuAF intelligence estimate from '88. And yes, it matters who created it and why, and how, and what assumptions they made.

 

An important clue here is that they didn't get the rocket propellant right, as well as some other assumptions which are not correct for a production slammer. This is from well before the 120 went into production.

 

I don't know what your author describes, you may want to summarize.

 

My question: Do you have any of these charts for the missile used in FC that you think should be the way they are in FC? Charts for AIM-120C5, AIM-120B, AIM-7M, R-27R/ER, RVV-AE???

 

We have various data, not all of it in charts.

[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

Check wags post. All missiles were affected but the R/ER disproportionately so since it is programmed with the weakest seeker logic.

 

I haven't seen that post, and ER tracking has seemed to work just fine to me. I've done a lot of 1v1 against Russian AI and of about 4-5 dozen times, I think the ER tracked my chaff only a handful of times. I always have the opposite problem of never being able to break it's lock.

 

Edit: This is the only thing I could find about chaff rejection from wags.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1825291&postcount=5

 

And this is the only thing I could find about him mentioning the R-27ER.

http://forums.eagle.ru/search.php?searchid=5871860


Edited by kk0425
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have various data, not all of it in charts.

 

Good, but why do not you present the data? If ER is bad, and AIM is good, I am accepted it, but provide information. How to could I see I was mistaken? As I gave you the wrong information, so you give me the right information!

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just take a look how the russian show the R-27R in every setting. Guys we cant use the R-27R in game because this missile going slowly so fast while the Aim-7 look much faster in our game. We are forced to take the R-27ER even knowing the R-27R is lighter.

 

You should use both of them. The ERs are for longer ranges, for pushing the enemy in the defense. And if you are somewhat closer launch the R's. Works quite well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen that post, and ER tracking has seemed to work just fine to me. I've done a lot of 1v1 against Russian AI and of about 4-5 dozen times, I think the ER tracked my chaff only a handful of times. I always have the opposite problem of never being able to break it's lock.

 

Edit: This is the only thing I could find about chaff rejection from wags.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1825291&postcount=5

 

And this is the only thing I could find about him mentioning the R-27ER.

http://forums.eagle.ru/search.php?searchid=5871860

 

From Wags:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1821654&postcount=432

 

Methodical testing of ER vs Chaffing/Non Chaffing target:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=103377

 

Go to posts 87 and 98 for a synopsis. Ptrack was 0.22 now 0.42

In my opinion it should be closer to 0.85/0.9 to reflect an 80s missile in almost ideal conditions.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Wags:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1821654&postcount=432

 

Methodical testing of ER vs Chaffing/Non Chaffing target:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=103377

 

Go to posts 87 and 98 for a synopsis. Ptrack was 0.22 now 0.42

In my opinion it should be closer to 0.85/0.9 to reflect an 80s missile in almost ideal conditions.

 

I'm a bit confused. First you mention that Wags said R/ERs have a higher chance of tracking chaff, and I tried to find the post just to confirm. But neither of those specifially say that R/ERs are weaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure i'll explain. 1st link Wags is posting in relation to why the ERs were so awful in tracking. Saying it was a bug that affected all missiles. But since the ERs have the worst programmed seeker logic than it affects the ERs the most.

 

2nd Link is in relation to your comment about ERs 'tracking just fine'. I present evidence to the contrary. It is methodical, systematic and repeatable. They do not track just fine.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its been a while since wags made that post, any idea when the fix finds its way to the jungle?

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fix has already found its way into the jungle.

 

There's some evaluation going on for additional work, but other than mentioning that, no comment.

[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

OK fair enough

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure i'll explain. 1st link Wags is posting in relation to why the ERs were so awful in tracking. Saying it was a bug that affected all missiles. But since the ERs have the worst programmed seeker logic than it affects the ERs the most.

 

2nd Link is in relation to your comment about ERs 'tracking just fine'. I present evidence to the contrary. It is methodical, systematic and repeatable. They do not track just fine.

 

1. There was nothing that said anything about ERs specifically. And I'm not seeing any evidence to support your claims in it being the weakest.

 

2. My results differ from yours. I see no reason why my experience has less value than yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. There was nothing that said anything about ERs specifically. And I'm not seeing any evidence to support your claims in it being the weakest.

 

2. My results differ from yours. I see no reason why my experience has less value than yours.

 

Post your results and we will see. Do you believe in scientific testing? Peer review? Do you realize being able to prove something and demonstrating it to your peers carries more weight than an opinion? I do. My testing is there for all to see. Yours?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post your results and we will see. Do you believe in scientific testing? Peer review? Do you realize being able to prove something and demonstrating it to your peers carries more weight than an opinion? I do. My testing is there for all to see. Yours?

 

What my experience is isn't up for debate. I'm asking you to provide ANY evidence to your claims about an official statement from ED saying that ERs have the weakest missile logic. Which is bunk anyway because in order to say that, you need something to compare it to. The AIM-7 for example would be good. So far all you demonstrated is the effectiveness of ERs prior to 1.2.5, and that is not good enough to be a scientific claim. A post full of numbers claiming that only one missile is underpowered means little. You seem to be reading between the lines that don't exist and think your postings count as an official statement from ED simply because they admitted to chaff being too strong for ALL missiles. Not just ER. If you find anything official that states ERs have the weakest logic, I'll be willing to accept that you're right. I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.

 

So now, find something from ED stating that ERs have the weakest logic or stop wasting everybody's time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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