AIM120C & R27ER % kills within FC2 compared to 1.12b

at high altitudes you might have far less seeker range head on than tail on.

Why is that?

Sorry - what I meant to say is ... the missile will fly much farther at high altitudes, so you might be able to achieve a higher launch range tail-on than head-on due to seeker limitations.

Sorry - what I meant to say is ... the missile will fly much farther at high altitudes, so you might be able to achieve a higher launch range tail-on than head-on due to seeker limitations.

Ahh, yes.

Actually, if the ET has the same seeker as the R-73, in a head on situation you should get the launch authorization at the same range with the R-73.

Edit:

I just noticed that the same topics were actually already discussed in the threat "SU-27 need corrections"..haven't red it yet.

R27ER % :thumbup: + FC 2

Hi,

Can I set sensitivity of AIM-120C to chaffs?

I was playing F-15C BWR duels whole weekend with precentage of succes around 50%-STT,30%-TWS. My wingman was around 70%, I was doing nothing wrong. Keeping target tracking to final time of missile onboard radar activation with ECM on. And there was only small percentage of missile passing trgt by with low speed inable to change course quickly(20%). All other was interested on chaffs.

There was mission where I shoot 2xAIM-120C from closer distance than my wingmans AIM-120B. AIM-120B reach the target with precise with both my rockets flyby target at distance 0,5nm propably confused by chaffs again.

Any idea to solve it?

120C is locked to be virtually immune to chaff. There are other reasons why they lose lock.

The most common reason for any of these missiles to lose lock is because the target enters

the doppler notch (beaming below the radar emitter, in the ARH case that is the missile itself).

Further, the 120C and 120B have different flight energy characteristics, different drag and

burn time, so they will have different speeds and approach the target from different angles

(different results for proportional navigation). This means while the 120C may be notched,

the 120B can be approaching from a different angle which isnt notched. Of course the

other way around may happen as well.

Third, the 120C has a higher loft angle than the 120B, and in many situations this

actually prevents it from keeping a lock as good as the 120B. The 120C will simply be easier

to spoof by notching under those conditions.

All the stuff I wrote here is an explanation of how the game works. I make no claims to say

"this is how it is in real life".

If you really want to make sure you are going to hit your target; approach from below and

fire once he gets close to Rtr. Then he will have a really hard time to escape the missile,

although attacking from below has its own disadvantages ;)

Well AMRAAMs are lacking something as compared to RL counterparts. They got no trajectory filters. Real AMRAAMs should aproach the target with a pre-computed set of waypoints to maximixe PK which doesnt happen in lockon thus the difference between the B and C slammers Yoda described (C should always be better). At the end game they should be facing the target at the same level, not looking down, this is not desirable for the increased radar noise. They should descend to the target in anticipation to achieve this effect instead of going straight for it.

But on the other hand --and I would like a confirmation of this-- I suspect Lockon's BVR missiles have inertial guidance error=0 and target updates in real time, though I also suspect the balance between whats undermodled and whats overmodeled is still negative. Not a complaint we still need a DCS level of implementation of this.

Thanks for an answer.

Two more simple question:

Will AIM-120 relock target after he disapears for a few seconds? (lets say after that target will be still in active radar homeing angle of AIM120).

So in this simulator AIM-120B can be confused by chaffs, and AIM-120C cant?

All active missiles, AMRAAMs and R-77 can and will reaquire as long as the target remains within a 60 degrees gimball cone. All these 3 can be confused by chaff as long as the target makes the correct moves to degrade its tracking abilities in the first place (low and notching) otheriwse chaff is useless. I dont know if they have differences in chaff rejection, I imagine they have.

1) I have put a bug in to investigate this some time ago

2) It appears it doesn't matter anyway; the range for tail-chases appears to be correct within the parameters defined by the combat manual; head-on range will never be ballistic range anyway, simply due to. Exercises launching missiles without lock are not valid because the only correct context of using the R-27ET is to use it LOBL.

 

Ground speed of 1400 for target and launcher will shrink the launch range to LESS than it is for the 1100kph/900kph scenario which I posted up there ... in other words, a 1km altitude, significantly less than 10km launch range.

The tail-on launch range for the R-27ER ... the REAL one, is about 10km - as per the diagram I posted - at 1km altitude.

You already lose 20% of that (approximately) just for not having the ogival dome, and having a spherical instead. If the target is traveling faster than what is listed in the diagram, the range will shrink even more.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=875764&postcount=142

can you post please the chart for the R 27 ET too?

TIA

Jaeger