Jump to content

AMRAAM Chaff Bug


dundun92

Recommended Posts

The AMRAAM now has the same chaff bug that affects SARH missiles. If you chaff the missile while notching, it will NEVER reacquire, but rather will fly harmlessly, allowing you to recommit immediately. Here are some videos/tacviews of this happening:

Notice in these videos how quickly I can recommit while still being in the missile FoV; this is because a chaffed AMRAAM will not reacquire

https://streamable.com/okp4ea.

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, the 120 despite having work completed to make it "more realistic", ED's own words, on the last patch it has been nerfed because it seems that on the Russian forums there has been an outcry that FC3 planes are having trouble with them and it seems if you speak Russian they are talking straight to the dev's, which have given in.

 

So we are back to balancing their game systems rather than realism. Not good, utterly disappointing. ED need to stop doing this if they are to be credible.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, the 120 despite having work completed to make it "more realistic", ED's own words, on the last patch it has been nerfed because it seems that on the Russian forums there has been an outcry that FC3 planes are having trouble with them and it seems if you speak Russian they are talking straight to the dev's, which have given in.

 

So we are back to balancing their game systems rather than realism. Not good, utterly disappointing. ED need to stop doing this if they are to be credible.

 

Im not quite sure what it has to do with FC3 but there you go lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it seems if you speak Russian they are talking straight to the dev's

 

Just wanted to say that IMHO you don't necessary have to speak Russian to talk straight to the devs. For example english-speaking guys from 100kiap/51pvo VFS (who fly exclusively REDFOR planes) provide their reasoning in english about missiles to the ED devs in the corresponding thread in russian part of the forum regularly (they also replied about the reason of this change here and in the AIM-120 thread in english part of the forum). If you have technically valid arguments / documents you can post it there and expect reply from the devs in english.


Edited by lester

Все написанное выше является моим оценочным суждением

Everything written above reflects my personal opinion

 

Занимаюсь "активной пропагандой Американцев на данном форуме" © Flanker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently it seems the AMRAAM will commit to a chaff bundle and only reacquire when it flies through it (leading it them to do a hard turn back into the target) or the bundle disappears then from there it will grab another one or the plane if its still in the seeker FOV.

 

 

 

yep, the 120 despite having work completed to make it "more realistic", ED's own words, on the last patch it has been nerfed because it seems that on the Russian forums there has been an outcry that FC3 planes are having trouble with them and it seems if you speak Russian they are talking straight to the dev's, which have given in.

 

So we are back to balancing their game systems rather than realism. Not good, utterly disappointing. ED need to stop doing this if they are to be credible.

 

 

Interesting conspiracy, I'd like to see you substantiate these claims.

According to these ED Staff posts

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4476779&postcount=9465

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4368210&postcount=8027

 

 

The change was an accidental result of chaining the CCM scale and was reverted this patch because they didn't see such high chaff rejection as the best option given how poor the EW modeling is in DCS at the moment.

 

 

In short they rolled it back to what they, ED thinks is correct.

 

 

 

Their words not mine.

 

 

 

You are free to try and convince them as to what the notching / EW should look like. As it is indeed very underwhelming in general at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That AMRAAM is not notched/chaffed... simple have no energy to kill you.

No they didnt lol, the AMRAAMs in the vids had PLENTY of energy left. They simply wont reacquire. I saw the AMRAAM drop off the RWR immediately after the notch, if its the tacview you are referring to.

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not quite sure what it has to do with FC3 but there you go lol

 

Await next response from me - however yes people using FC3 aircraft complaining, mainly from the Russian forum's and understandably their favourite aircraft and how they cannot compete with 120s. I don't like the change as it makes it easier for me to notch missiles.


Edited by Hawkeye_UK

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently it seems the AMRAAM will commit to a chaff bundle and only reacquire when it flies through it (leading it them to do a hard turn back into the target) or the bundle disappears then from there it will grab another one or the plane if its still in the seeker FOV.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting conspiracy, I'd like to see you substantiate these claims.

According to these ED Staff posts

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4476779&postcount=9465

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4368210&postcount=8027

 

 

The change was an accidental result of chaining the CCM scale and was reverted this patch because they didn't see such high chaff rejection as the best option given how poor the EW modeling is in DCS at the moment.

 

 

In short they rolled it back to what they, ED thinks is correct.

 

 

 

Their words not mine.

 

 

 

You are free to try and convince them as to what the notching / EW should look like. As it is indeed very underwhelming in general at the moment.

 

Ok Lets see, so if you think there have been no complaints on the forums direct to one of the main devs from FC3 players then have a review of the following;

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473481&postcount=9430

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472634&postcount=9400

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472825&postcount=9405

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472854&postcount=9406

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473158&postcount=9421

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473863&postcount=9432

 

So no conspiracy, maybe don't just read the English forums lol ;-)

 

Reality is the 120's are super easy to evade now, it wasn't exactly hard before to be honest as with the sam's but now, yea its super easy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Lets see, so if you think there have been no complaints on the forums direct to one of the main devs from FC3 players then have a review of the following;

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473481&postcount=9430

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472634&postcount=9400

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472825&postcount=9405

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472854&postcount=9406

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473158&postcount=9421

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473863&postcount=9432

 

So no conspiracy, maybe don't just read the English forums lol ;-)

 

Reality is the 120's are super easy to evade now, it wasn't exactly hard before to be honest as with the sam's but now, yea its super easy.

 

 

If you bothered to more than skim the post I sent you'd see they're not only from the Russian forum but that very same thread.

You're also a poor liar as I never said no one complained.

 

 

People complain in that thread and that forum quite often and nothing ever comes of it.

But you chose to ignore what the ED devs had said to fit your world view? In that case suit your self and enjoy your own private little dilusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you bothered to more than skim the post I sent you'd see they're not only from the Russian forum but that very same thread.

You're also a poor liar as I never said no one complained.

 

 

People complain in that thread and that forum quite often and nothing ever comes of it.

But you chose to ignore what the ED devs had said to fit your world view? In that case suit your self and enjoy your own private little dilusion.

 

oh dear, ok so just to clarify you said my comments where conspiracy in nature, aka that there had been no complaints. You implied very strongly that my reference had no substitute in truth, that is not a lie that is something that has happened. That is not debatable but a matter of fact.

 

As for your other comments re delusional i'd like to refer you to 1.2 of the forum rules "Forum members must treat each other with respect and tolerance". One thing i would say is that perhaps you should have respect for people on here, as you never quite know that person's background or their real world experience.

 

It's a shame how the internet encourages some elements of society to say things that they would not dare say to someone's face and thus when posting anything that is a good rule to have. Wish you all the best and remember the forum rules.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much pathos in this thread...

 

Thank you for the videos, which speak for themselves. Let's hope it is fixed soon.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Await next response from me - however yes people using FC3 aircraft complaining, mainly from the Russian forum's and understandably their favourite aircraft and how they cannot compete with 120s. I don't like the change as it makes it easier for me to notch missiles.

 

As opposed to people complaining it is not effective enough, same vibe, alternate complaint.

I'm in the opposite end of the spectrum to you as I found it 'way too easy to kill' Russian aircraft in the previous patch, now it is downgraded to just 'easy to kill'.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should it reacquire after selecting chaff? It should reject chaff and just keep the predicted intercept course if the target has notched, waiting for it to reappear in doppler shift, and if target reappeared with a tasty enough radial speed IN THE SEEKER FOV - reacquire - hence the memory mode and all that digital microprocessor stuff. But if it liked the chaff's radial speed and signature which by a coincidence of lots of factors it may - why should it drop the locked target it already considered valid? It should never do that because that would make attacks of groups impossible.

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should it reacquire after selecting chaff? It should reject chaff and just keep the predicted intercept course if the target has notched, waiting for it to reappear in doppler shift, and if target reappeared with a tasty enough radial speed IN THE SEEKER FOV - reacquire - hence the memory mode and all that digital microprocessor stuff. But if it liked the chaff's radial speed and signature which by a coincidence of lots of factors it may - why should it drop the locked target it already considered valid? It should never do that because that would make attacks of groups impossible.

Why would a missile lock on to a stationary chaff? Even if it locked on initially, its gonna drop below the doppler filter very quickly, and the missile is going to go back into search/memory mode, and reacquire you the instant you recommit. In all these cases I was in the seeker FoV when I recommitted. I know this because if you repeat this without chaff it reacquires as expected

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would a missile lock on to a stationary chaff? Even if it locked on initially, its gonna drop below the doppler filter very quickly, and the missile is going to go back into search/memory mode, and reacquire you the instant you recommit. In all these cases I was in the seeker FoV when I recommitted. I know this because if you repeat this without chaff it reacquires as expected

Nothing beats an ACMI file in such conversations....

Now I see...

- In DCS you've fallen victim of the fact DCS chaff uses copypasted flare logic. Untill its reworked we have to bear with it. It affects all ARH and SARH in the engine.

- IRL chaff cloud still needs time to stop + it's very floaty and keeps in the air flying for long time.

- IRL chaff is different based on it's physical properties and geometry. And based on that it may be nonexistent for the radar altogether. Or other way around, act like a brick wall - you can reject it's signature all the way but you can't see behind it. And all of that merrily changes with aspect. So I can understand why ED went with the "radar flare" approach - real chaff is so much harder to implement.

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should it reacquire after selecting chaff? It should reject chaff and just keep the predicted intercept course if the target has notched, waiting for it to reappear in doppler shift, and if target reappeared with a tasty enough radial speed IN THE SEEKER FOV - reacquire - hence the memory mode and all that digital microprocessor stuff. But if it liked the chaff's radial speed and signature which by a coincidence of lots of factors it may - why should it drop the locked target it already considered valid? It should never do that because that would make attacks of groups impossible.

 

Watch the tacview in the first video again. The missile never selects chaff. It gets notched, and when he turns hot the missile wakes up and goes straight for the chaff that is far behind him. It is not logical because it is his turning hot that wakes up the missile, but instead it goes for his chaff which is still on his old notching-trajectory.

 

The rhetoric and insulting going on (in another thread mostly) obscures the issue, but the behavior is obviously a bug.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing beats an ACMI file in such conversations....

Now I see...

- In DCS you've fallen victim of the fact DCS chaff uses copypasted flare logic. Untill its reworked we have to bear with it. It affects all ARH and SARH in the engine.

- IRL chaff cloud still needs time to stop + it's very floaty and keeps in the air flying for long time.

- IRL chaff is different based on it's physical properties and geometry. And based on that it may be nonexistent for the radar altogether. Or other way around, act like a brick wall - you can reject it's signature all the way but you can't see behind it. And all of that merrily changes with aspect. So I can understand why ED went with the "radar flare" approach - real chaff is so much harder to implement.

 

 

I think your confusing "keeps in the air flying for long time" and having a doppler shift. Yes chaff stays airborne for a long time, but only for a very short time does it have a Vc above the doppler filter. Once the chaff drops below the Vc filter (again this happens very quickly, chaff is very light), the radar can filter it out as normal. Now if the plane is passing through the beam when dispensing chaff, and the chaff has a higher RCS, its very likely that it could, for that moment, switch to the chaff, and temporarily take the beam off the target. However as most sources make clear, the chaff will drop below the doppler filter very quickly, and the missile would go back into search/memory, and find you when you reaqcuire IF you are in the FoV, which would be true for the almost instant recommits you see me doing in the vid.

 

Now IK that proper chaff modeling isnt quite so simple to emulate. But at least ED, for now, can tune things so the same net effect is produced: e.g, you cant expect to notch for 0.1 sec and recommit and not expect the missile to find you again. And this is for all the DCS RF missiles.

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As opposed to people complaining it is not effective enough, same vibe, alternate complaint.

I'm in the opposite end of the spectrum to you as I found it 'way too easy to kill' Russian aircraft in the previous patch, now it is downgraded to just 'easy to kill'.

 

Yea rarely fly against FC3 aircraft in our pvp server re point and shoot. way to easy and my request to make them harder is born out of a desire not to have it easy. Rare to see the FC3 aircraft going up unless we have a new player etc, most migrate onto the JF17 re redfor

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your confusing "keeps in the air flying for long time" and having a doppler shift. Yes chaff stays airborne for a long time, but only for a very short time does it have a Vc above the doppler filter. Once the chaff drops below the Vc filter (again this happens very quickly, chaff is very light), the radar can filter it out as normal. Now if the plane is passing through the beam when dispensing chaff, and the chaff has a higher RCS, its very likely that it could, for that moment, switch to the chaff, and temporarily take the beam off the target. However as most sources make clear, the chaff will drop below the doppler filter very quickly, and the missile would go back into search/memory, and find you when you reaqcuire IF you are in the FoV, which would be true for the almost instant recommits you see me doing in the vid.

 

Now IK that proper chaff modeling isnt quite so simple to emulate. But at least ED, for now, can tune things so the same net effect is produced: e.g, you cant expect to notch for 0.1 sec and recommit and not expect the missile to find you again. And this is for all the DCS RF missiles.

 

Actually so much more is going on, however chaff just doesn’t disappear cause it’s not moving. A radar beam or radar pulse is nothing more then just radiation going out and bouncing back to the antenna yes there is multiple ways pulses can be manipulated but no matter What radar your using everything is going to reflect energy back to the antenna, even a cloud. So yes even though the radar is a Doppler shift radar the Radar still has to deal with everything out there. So chaff just doesn’t disappear when it slows down. In fact as the missile is getting closer the Antenna will have so much energy bouncing back from the chaff the radar will not be able to detect anything else plus there is also a minimum range between objects before a radar can determine the difference and although it is small it is still in the meters. So that’s why we have anti clutter circuits to help the user or help the radar process what’s going on within the pulses. So if chaff is over whelming the antenna then the radar will have to use AGC of some sort (or another circuits we use on our own radars but don’t wish to talk about) which is now making the antenna less sensitive which now helps it to detect pulses that are bouncing of a moving target but that now decreases detection range and it also takes time, in fact it will Most likely be using pulse to pulse integration to build up enough research to now determine that there is actually a moving target, it’s not instant And it can actually take a second or 2 or even 3. Now every time it loses the target it will have to go through the process again and depending on how long it has lost track can mean the processing has to start from the beginning taking all that time again. So while the radar is dealing with all that the target has now flown outside the missiles FOV so unless it’s updated by datalink it will never find the target again cause it has recalculated the intercept point by its last track, I know someone here will talk about how it has 60degree FOV but even that is pushing the boundary as that will more then likely be on the very limits of the 3db point so will only pickup targets that are very close meaning the target actually won’t be hugely off bore sight before it picks it up again. I’m not confident on what I can say so I’ll leave it at that but I have had doubts for awhile that the Aim-120 can be so resistant to chaff. Especially against aircraft will low RCS


Edited by Blinky.ben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know someone here will talk about how it has 60degree FOV but even that is pushing the boundary as that will more then likely be on the very limits of the 3db point so will only pickup targets that are very close meaning the target actually won’t be hugely off bore sight before it picks it up again.

 

With FOV they are refering to the gimbal limit of the seeker, which is propably +/-60°.

 

But the -3dB beamwidth (the beamwidth of the seeker antenna) will be far far less. To cover the whole +/-60° gimbal in both dimensions the seeker has to do mechanical scanning with its antenna which will take some time (not really modelled in DCS).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not saying the chaff just dissapears, im saying that the radar can filter out the chaff reflections because it has the wrong frequency. Granted, you could overwhelm the seeker at really close range, but thats clearly not whats going on here, at least not at the ranges encountered here. And BlackPixxel is correct, the AMRAAM works like a normal radar scan; it has a narrow beam that is swept across the 60° FoV, and it should take some time, though not a whole ton. Definitely would be an issue if the lock is lost at close ranges however. Also afaik its ±30 for a total of 60° though i could be wrong here.

 

 

EDIT yup I was wrong it is ±60° for a total of 120°


Edited by dundun92

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With FOV they are refering to the gimbal limit of the seeker, which is propably +/-60°.

 

But the -3dB beamwidth (the beamwidth of the seeker antenna) will be far far less. To cover the whole +/-60° gimbal in both dimensions the seeker has to do mechanical scanning with its antenna which will take some time (not really modelled in DCS).

 

I came back cause I realised what I said about this was not stated correctly. Thanks for that tho

 

But one thing I would Like to put out there. People in the DCS community do have a lot of knowledge in certain areas so we will always find some way to point out something that’s wrong. But in the end it is impossible to programme real world correctly so in the end the Aim120 we have is a very good missile and is easily the best missile in DCS. There’s no cheating going on and people will always want the missile that wins no matter how fake it my be. So let’s be happy with what We have so the dev’s can start spending time on more thing to benefit everyone. At least till the meteor comes out anyway lol


Edited by Blinky.ben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually so much more is going on, however chaff just doesn’t disappear cause it’s not moving. A radar beam or radar pulse is nothing more then just radiation going out and bouncing back to the antenna yes there is multiple ways pulses can be manipulated but no matter What radar your using everything is going to reflect energy back to the antenna, even a cloud. So yes even though the radar is a Doppler shift radar the Radar still has to deal with everything out there. So chaff just doesn’t disappear when it slows down. In fact as the missile is getting closer the Antenna will have so much energy bouncing back from the chaff the radar will not be able to detect anything else plus there is also a minimum range between objects before a radar can determine the difference and although it is small it is still in the meters. So that’s why we have anti clutter circuits to help the user or help the radar process what’s going on within the pulses. So if chaff is over whelming the antenna then the radar will have to use AGC of some sort (or another circuits we use on our own radars but don’t wish to talk about) which is now making the antenna less sensitive which now helps it to detect pulses that are bouncing of a moving target but that now decreases detection range and it also takes time, in fact it will Most likely be using pulse to pulse integration to build up enough research to now determine that there is actually a moving target, it’s not instant And it can actually take a second or 2 or even 3. Now every time it loses the target it will have to go through the process again and depending on how long it has lost track can mean the processing has to start from the beginning taking all that time again. So while the radar is dealing with all that the target has now flown outside the missiles FOV so unless it’s updated by datalink it will never find the target again cause it has recalculated the intercept point by its last track, I know someone here will talk about how it has 60degree FOV but even that is pushing the boundary as that will more then likely be on the very limits of the 3db point so will only pickup targets that are very close meaning the target actually won’t be hugely off bore sight before it picks it up again. I’m not confident on what I can say so I’ll leave it at that but I have had doubts for awhile that the Aim-120 can be so resistant to chaff. Especially against aircraft will low RCS

 

 

Even if its a gamey emulation (like instant scans delayed by a few seconds etc) it would be nice if the new EW system tried to take a lot of this into account so NEZ shots could have a bit more weight to them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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