Super 530D updates?

Hello RAZBAM,

I know this hasn't been in the list of systems to be updated in the MLU, but what is the time table (far future, I guess) for the 530D update?

The fact is that I only do A2A sorties and the whole DCS universe is way behind on this mainly because of missile mechanics. There is also the missing advanced radar modes or the annoying FCC simplifications (M-pole, F-pole, A-pole, Husky mode for ARH) on the newer fighters, but the Mirage is quite complete for BVR and WVR.

Unfortunately, the 530D, as almost all other DCS missiles (exception may be the Sparrow which got a special ED update but I didn't test it), has very poor logic - fooled by chaff at launch moment and low speed. While the on-chaff-guidance can definitely happen, the ECCM capability is one of the main features of this missile so it should almost never happen at launch ranges. Furthermore, the D has mainly improvements for low flying targets guidance which impair ECCM improvements as the ground is the largest chaff cloud out there. While I am not a real life pilot or involved with missile developing, I really can't see the 530D going for the first chaff cloud 90% of the time. I think most of the time, a modern missile should be kinetically beaten or out-turned, the latter with the pilot sweating like in a sauna :). Notching should also be a way of missile evading at long ranges but with a lower probability and only because the launching platform radar is affected by this.

The speed of the missile is another issue as I'm seeing the 530D accelerating to only 1'600-1'700 kTAS after launch which is not Mach 4.5 - ~2'700 kTAS at FL250 in ISA conditions. I know it doesn't always go to maximum speed especially if it has to turn after launch as the pilot couldn't nail the maximum probability of kill launch parameters, but it still should be around that value. I see the R-27ERs go to 2'500 kTAS 90% of the time which is correct, and so should the 530D. It is an interceptor's missile so it should be fast.

And one more thing about the 530D is that you can change targets while the missile is in flight. It of course has some limitations but it should be there.

And finally, are we going to get the MICA missile :)?

Cheers and thank you for this superb model and giving me a bridge between Falcon BMS and DCS,

Adrian

And one more thing about the 530D is that you can change targets while the missile is in flight. It of course has some limitations but it should be there.

While the rest is debatable, do you have a source on this ?

And why would you want the MICA missiles ?

Yeah, unfortunately the -C does not carry MICA, we'll have to wait for a 2000-5 before being able to use Fox 3.

Hi myHelljumper,

While the rest is debatable, do you have a source on this ?

My understanding (from various sources on the net not necessarily pertaining to just the 530D, but to same age same technology non-the-less) we have here a passive CW monopulse tracker with Doppler filtering. After launch the missile points itself to the target (datalink just before launch) and starts doing signal processing and proportional navigation to intercept the target. When the signal stops being received (or sent by the launcher as in a lock loss) the missile flies straight. When the signal is regained (all signal lobes, etc. etc.) the tracking resumes. Even if the signal was lost for 10 seconds. Nothing, besides the lack of signal can stop that missile to resume tracking (electronics doesn't stop) - OK, after 10 seconds of flying straight it would be a miracle to still regain the whole radar signal in the antennae gimbals (even signal lobes that don't hit the target need to be captured, otherwise signal integration will not resemble original signal.

This implies switching targets, though, again, getting the entire signal from a different position target is quite hard to do unless they're in a tight finger formation :).

Because of how the monopulse CW tracking works it is not a problem for "buddy illumination". STT uses different parameters for even the same radar model (small changes in frequency and/or lobe amplitude and/or polarization) so no two planes can drive the same missile unless they have the same physical radar set or the missile's electronics are tweaked to "listen" to some other radar.

That is my understanding and it may be wrong, of course :). I don't have access to real pilots/engineers/technicians who actually work in L'Armee de L'Air or any Air Force for that matter.

And why would you want the MICA missiles ?

The MICA is the replacement of the 530 and is active radar homing :) and is carried by the Mirage 2000. I am quite happy with Fox 1 missiles, but having a longer reach won't hurt anyone. The AIM-120 is there so why wouldn't this be. Again, not forcing anything just wondering if it could get a time slice after everything else is done - I happily saw that you are doing lots of projects.

Thanks,

Adrian

Anyway, the other issues are more pressing for me.

Adrian

The MICA is the replacement of the 530 and is active radar homing :) and is carried by the Mirage 2000. I am quite happy with Fox 1 missiles, but having a longer reach won't hurt anyone. The AIM-120 is there so why wouldn't this be. Again, not forcing anything just wondering if it could get a time slice after everything else is done - I happily saw that you are doing lots of projects.

Are you aware the the 2000C does not carry the MICA missile ? The 2000-5 do and it's a different aircraft with upgraded radar and avionics.

I don't know if implied this with your answer but I don't work for Razbam :D

As for the changing targets it's interesting but from my understanding the missiles guides from the energy that is returned by the target from the shooters radar, so if you change target the energy will come from somewhere else and the missile seeker might not see the new reflection.

Or are you talking about some sort of communication between the aircraft and the missile that can tell the missile where the target is ?

Anyway, Razbam is working with the help of the AdA so they can use the module for some training, so if the missile was not performing realistically I think they would have asked for it to be changed :).

As for the changing targets it's interesting but from my understanding the missiles guides from the energy that is returned by the target from the shooters radar, so if you change target the energy will come from somewhere else and the missile seeker might not see the new reflection.

That's exactly what I also said. The new target has to be within the limits, of course.

If Razbam is working with the AdA then that is super. I just saw no missile update on the list there.

About the MICA, you are right. A new radar set is needed and they said it'll be the C not -5.

Thanks!

That's exactly what I also said. The new target has to be within the limits, of course.

 

If Razbam is working with the AdA then that is super. I just saw no missile update on the list there.

 

Re-lock is already implemented. If you lose lock, then reacquire it and the illuminated target is still within missile's gimbal limits, it will start to track it again.

About the MICA, you are right. A new radar set is needed and they said it'll be the C not -5.

 

Thanks!

There is a lot of confusion about Mirage 2000 family, and you're not the only one.

Mirage 2000C had different sub-standards.

Mirage 2000C is only French. Export variant were Mirage 2000E with RDM radar.

Mirage 2000C S1/ S2/ S3 (#1 => #37) used RDM radar and Super 530F missile (from Mirage F1).

Mirage 2000C S4/ S5 (#38 => #124) used RDI radar and Super 530D missile.

No Mirage 2000C ever used Mica missile.

To use Mica you need Mirage 2000-5 with RDY radar. It isn't the same weapon system.

That's the way it is. Razbam is doing Mirage 2000C S5.

For Mirage 2000-5 we will see in the future, but it's all about Mirage 2000C here.

Mirage 2000C is only French. Export variant were Mirage 2000E with RDM radar.

Interesting. What about the Mirage the Indian Air Force received during the 80's ? Do you have any information about their system then ?

Mirage 2000H use RDM radar, fitted with Continuous Wave Illuminator (CWI) to be compatible with Super 530D.

So did U.A.E. Mirage 2000 EAD or Greek Mirage 2000EG. However for Greek Mirage it was a later upgrade.

I'm not sure about Egyptian Mirage 2000M.

French Mirage 2000C RDM apparently never received the CWI and were limited to Super 530F.

That's exactly what I also said. The new target has to be within the limits, of course.

As earnil said, you can re-lock the target after the lock is lost and get the kill, but the target must not have changed its trajectory or it will be out of the seeker FOV. I don't know if you can switch targets this way, I will try to test it if I can.

Regarding your other remarks :

- ECCM/chaff : My missiles don't usually get spoofed by chaff, and there were some drama not long ago that the 530D resistance to chaff is the best of all the fox1 missiles in DCS so I don't share your "going for the first chaff cloud 90% of the time" statement. Could you provide a track/video where you have this issue please ?

- Max speed : Take a look a this post : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2998256&postcount=40

Someone provided a track and I played it and analysed it. You can see that when the shooter aircraft is at high speed (1.4 mach) and high altitude (45 kft) the missile reaches 4.25 mach, it's not too far of the 4.5 mach. I'm sure if the shooter is flying 0.25 mach faster the missile will reach 4.5 mach :).

But maybe you have a source that said that the missile can reach 4.5 mach at 25 kft ? If so i'm very interested :).

Thank you for the details jojo))

When the signal stops being received (or sent by the launcher as in a lock loss) the missile flies straight.

Why would it flight straight?

Nothing, besides the lack of signal can stop that missile to resume tracking (electronics doesn't stop)

There is some ECM out there that would disagree with you.

Because of how the monopulse CW tracking works it is not a problem for "buddy illumination".

Oh, yes it is. In fact it's such a huge problem that it requires signal deconfliction among flight members, setting up radars to function on different channels, and missiles tune to the specific radar.

STT uses different parameters for even the same radar model (small changes in frequency and/or lobe amplitude and/or polarization) so no two planes can drive the same missile unless they have the same physical radar set or the missile's electronics are tweaked to "listen" to some other radar.

 

That is my understanding and it may be wrong, of course :).

It is wrong.

While the rest is debatable, do you have a source on this ?

I already done that thing IG few times ago, will try to redo it as soon as I can.