BVR Tactics

 

Oh you couldn't be more wrong about this. :D It's all down to the scenario and what both of you do throughout the fight. Stop telling yourself that it's impossible because you're creating an imaginary bullshit in your head that in the end blocks any progression. Start asking people, start searching and looking for information, start thinking, start experimenting.

 

Agreed! Sure whole thing is complex and that´s just where it starts getting interesting for me to see that guided missiles are not just hitting targets in any case as stated in some handbook tables but just exploting their weaknesses, and what else ist more rewarding than a merge?

Yep it's always risky, the idea is that my first missile forces you to be defensive and then I can close up for a second shot that will either kill you or make you run back to your base, albeit datalink is a lot more helpful in these kind of scenarios than what the Eagle has as you can still see more or less how close the guy chasing you is. Of course using terrain masking you can deny the second shot and come back but if you're facing someone that flies visually and can predict your moves you'll have a hard time, but very few are there who actually do this. Also if you didn't have the advantage at the first shot then this doesn't really work out, but then again most of the russian birds you meet will be always lower than you.

I will judge my maneuvers according to the distance to You and Your first shot doesnt play any role here, over 10nm its wasted anyway, in fact I dont even notice it as You fire in TWS. On a certain distance I just assume You already fired and the first shot is evaded before appearing on my rwr. Then the dancing starts and its more complex than just pushing and extending. If I cant get out of Your radar cone I will flee and You have a real chance to get me, unless You run into some ET from others. If I can get out of Your radar cone mostly it works with terrain or other bandits needing Your attention I will try to get You. Of all of this I have a good overview on my datalink. If You have good visual orientation and can predict my moves You will most likely get me, but this is f.....ing difficult and I don´t know many guys who can do this and as said often results in a mutual kill due to the excellent SA in russian birds. And that´s just what makes things interesting!

This was just the offensive version when I want to be defensive my maneuvering starts before firing ranges and I try to get You that way You never knew I was there.

Definitely not publication bias. Nor would I expect a new weapon to be out-performed (or have similar performance) by an old weapon - right now it's all 'meh it's all the same' :)

 

The bias here is a wishful thinking - the wishful thinking that dodging 120's should somehow be easy and you can easily fight back with technology that's decades older.

 

I'll put it in other words: It's actually quite a bit like saying that a vietnam era sparrow should be on part with an R-27R, just maybe a little bit shorter ranged.

 

With respect to tactics, this entire 'missile thing' prevents employment of realistic BVR tactics. There are definitely documented anti-eagle and anti-AMRAAM tactics, not just tidbids on 'Dogfights/History Channel', but documented in tactics manuals and verified by instructors who teach those tactics. You might say that in some respects, they look liek what's being described here, but they pretty much begin with this gem: Don't get closer than 15nm to an AMRAAM carrier until they waste all their weapons. There's no 'sniff the ground, make a few wild turns and drop some chaff' tactic. In fact, they try to be M1+ and if possible, at higher altitude than some opponents (eg. F-16's) but the rule is still 'stay away'.

 

The tactics change if you have a numerical advantage, but depend heavily on un-targeted entries which may or may not be possible.

That´s again when this topic gets very emotional. I don´t care which is better amraam or ERs or 77s and I love flying F-15. For me its just interesting to get some portrait about how modern air combat could be. But I mostly sense these Emotions on side of the AMRAAM-lovers. Of course an AMRAAM can be evaded its just the question to which degree, which parameters (distances) this is possible. Maybe they arent correct modeled yet but I too (as Blaze) think they aren´t that far from being correct. And of course It´s understandable to advice in real combat to stay at least 15 nm away. I would do the same if I want to be sure and win or loss depends on a much wider szenario in real and its my own life on the edge and not just some airquaking resulting to a diffrent number on the losses side. Who ever would test out this dancing in between all this spamraaming.

Well high to low shot at 15nm is useless but when you're doing real BVR they're essential. Btw I never said missiles are fine ingame IMO, but I don't bother debating them since I don't have any IRL proof or knowledge to be fair. So I accept them as they are and hope for the better, I'll leave the "what it should perform like" argument to those who have a clue about that. I don't.

However it's clear that there are a lot of issues around network issues such as lags and warping. You can't have everyone with a perfect connection :D

That´s again when this topic gets very emotional. I don´t care which is better amraam or ERs or 77s and I love flying F-15. For me its just interesting to get some portrait about how modern air combat could be. But I mostly sense these Emotions on side of the AMRAAM-lovers.

You see what you want to see, and you forget a lot of what you have seen.

Maybe they arent correct modeled yet but I too (as Blaze) think they aren´t that far from being correct.

And of course It´s understandable to advice in real combat to stay at least 15 nm away.

Here's what you didn't know: That's just outside the 120A's Rtr. You come any closer, your chances of turning around and out-running it are zero. Your only way to evade the missile inside this range is to actually perform a good notch or whatever other defense may be available, but your option to run is no longer there. This is not represented in-game, the missile has far too little energy at range.

GG

You can shrink his DLZ by dropping alt. Unless you're flying above a SAM zone. :D

No, you can't, only the shooter can do that by dropping altitude. The target doesn't have as much effect - you'll do more bad things to the missile by being above the shooter than the other way around. And this is why med-low shots are supposed to be so unpleasant. The AIM-120 has a minimum 10nm effective range from zero altitude and zero speed launch - that would be the SLAMRAAM umbrella.

GG

 

You can shrink his DLZ by dropping alt. Unless you're flying above a SAM zone. :D

But it makes the missile bleed more speed due to much higher drag while you're not losing that much speed in relation. I don't understand :<

The missile is going downhill, so your ability to 'shrink the DLZ' is minimal. And while you're not losing speed, it doesn't matter: Your speed is actually capped at something less than required to escape the Rtr because you're that low.

Not only that, but the Rtr has a very specific definition, and is calculated such that your chances of outrunning that missile once inside it are zero unless you're piloting a UFO - ie. an aircraft that can turn around and accelerate faster than anything this DLZ is calculated for. But let's say that DLZs are quite a bit more complex than what we get in FC. There are far more things taken into account.

But it makes the missile bleed more speed due to much higher drag while you're not losing that much speed in relation. I don't understand :<

Closure rate has an effect on DLZ, so you can only control this by slowing down. That however will make you less effective offensively.

But it makes the missile bleed more speed due to much higher drag while you're not losing that much speed in relation. I don't understand :<

Do you gain speed while diving?

If so/not, what would make the difference to a missile?

Air density-induced drag doesn't swallow all of that kinetic energy. Further, a missile with quality intercept logic can hold off the dive until later in the intercept, meaning that it gains both the advantage of staying above and maintaining speed, and trading altitude for speed which compensates for both induced drag, and turn drag.

Closure rate has an effect on DLZ, so you can only control this by slowing down. That however will make you less effective offensively.

Depends on exactly how you choose to "slow down"; or, more importantly, change the rate of closure. Throttle, yes. Angular offset, no.

Slowing down too much can make things even worse, but it depends on your ability to accelerate. The DLZ is usually described as 'a 180 degree turn made at X g the moment the missile is launched, followed by acceleration to M1.2 in Y seconds' .. as an example.

Closure rate has an effect on DLZ, so you can only control this by slowing down. That however will make you less effective offensively.

Air density-induced drag doesn't swallow all of that kinetic energy.

I haven't tested it but I sure as hell do feel like it slows down a lot more if you drag it down low. What I don't really understand is, that you maintain your speed (or increase it due to diving in one of the more critical parts of the drag), while you make the missile fly through a lot denser air. Even if you're high after you turn cold you'll defeat the missile long before you happen to be at that speed that would be beyond your low alt max. Perhaps the only exception to this is when you're having no fuel tanks at all.

Further, a missile with quality intercept logic can hold off the dive until later in the intercept, meaning that it gains both the advantage of staying above and maintaining speed, and trading altitude for speed which compensates for both induced drag, and turn drag.

Good point.

Depends on exactly how you choose to "slow down"; or, more importantly, change the rate of closure. Throttle, yes. Angular offset, no.

Can I have a "Why?" on this? I don't really understand.

Depends on exactly how you choose to "slow down"; or, more importantly, change the rate of closure. Throttle, yes. Angular offset, no.

Yeah I know I over simplified some, but it was also based on the context of a particular post. Which seemed to me being about delaying a shoot cue, while in a position of disadvantage. His concept of descending while not loosing speed (or effecting closure) was flawed. It implies also already being under the opponent, and probably having not fired yet.

I haven't tested it but I sure as hell do feel like it slows down a lot more if you drag it down low.

Yes it does, as it's supposed to. But the dive allows it to get rid of induced drag in some cases as well as get rid of some significant fraction of a g of deceleration, and it's already far, faaaaaaar less draggy than your aircraft is.

What I don't really understand is, that you maintain your speed (or increase it due to diving in one of the more critical parts of the drag), while you make the missile fly through a lot denser air.

Even if you're high after you turn cold you'll defeat the missile long before you happen to be at that speed that would be beyond your low alt max.

Slowing down too much can make things even worse, but it depends on your ability to accelerate. The DLZ is usually described as 'a 180 degree turn made at X g the moment the missile is launched, followed by acceleration to M1.2 in Y seconds' .. as an example.

I was merely expressing that it has an effect, not that it was actually wise.

Spade, the argument was dragging, not offense. Being slower doesn't reduce closure when you're running. Delaying shot in inferior position can make sense if you know how far you can push without risking too much, especailly if you're trying to make up the energy difference while you're delaying. Not a winning position, but can turn into one.

No you won't, because you are in the Rtr. The choice of designation for this zone is not random. If the missile is defeated by a turn and run maneuver from inside the Rtr in-game, then either the Rtr or the missile is modeled incorrectly.

I'm positive you can outrun missiles from inside Rtr, how much inside, I don't have a clear idea, but definitely inside it. Probably no hope when you're getting inside 2/3 Rtr though but that's really damn close now.

What the problem is, I can't tell right now. As you say it can be missile performance, guidance issues, network issues, or just mismodeling of the DLZ. Or a combination of some or all. :D

Same reason why high-to-low shots are better than low-to-high shots in general

That's a different thing IMO. A jet has relatively infinite power compared to a missile, and when you start the drag the motor's usually burnt out already. So again you make it slow down quicker while you're keeping up your speed if not increasing it. That in theory will reduce the effective range it can travel, while you're pretty much flying the same distance away from it. That would imply you reduced it's range, wouldn't it?

Obviously when you're trying to sustain your chances of fighting back you don't want to go dragging low but this is not what I'm talking about, just pure defense.

That's a different thing IMO. A jet has relatively infinite power compared to a missile' date=' and when you start the drag the motor's usually burnt out already. So again you make it slow down quicker while you're keeping up your speed if not increasing it. That in theory will reduce the effective range it can travel, while you're pretty much flying the same distance away from it. That would imply you reduced it's range, wouldn't it?[/quote']

 

This works only when you are outside of the Rtr. 'Shrinking the range' once inside the Rtr is no longer an option. You can shrink the Rtr by turning because you are now closer to completing your 180. But the definition of the Rtr makes it necessary for you to execute the escape maneuver the moment the missile is launched. Doing so after means the missile will reach you.

 

The Rtr is the maximum range at which you can perform a specific escape maneuver and outrun the missile, and this is a max performance maneuver followed by acceleration beyond the speed you came in with usually.

 

Obviously when you're trying to sustain your chances of fighting back you don't want to go dragging low but this is not what I'm talking about, just pure defense.

Pure defense means you're bugging out. The entire point of this conversation has been that these missiles don't really make you bug out. You shouldn't even be thinking of coming out of the notch at under 10nm, or turning around for a fight at distances shorter than that. Terrain can change things, but even then you should be under pressure. DCS AAMs right now do not provide this at sufficient range in my opinion.

So, the conclusion is that ingame DLZ is not in sync with what the missiles are capable of currently?

Neither the DLZ is tuned well, nor is the missile (actually I think the only missile that's relatively well tuned in terms of kinematics is the AIM-9).

The DLZ is very simply calculated, so it can't cover all situations even if the missile is well tuned, but it should give you at least a reasonable idea of what the missile can do.

There is a lot of stuff that's not quite right. We have a good sim, it can be better. Right now BVR tactics aren't very useable because of the missile drag and sensor capabilities pretty much force the BVR missiles into a WVR arena, as well as destroying high-low shot capability.

So' date=' the conclusion is that ingame DLZ is not in sync with what the missiles are capable of currently?[/quote']

Can I have a "Why?" on this? I don't really understand.

For reals? You already inferred it earlier through your comments on pursuit curves going for the kill.

Example: two aircraft are at significant range. Both are doing 500 knots.

a. If both aircraft are pointed at one another, the rate of closure is 1000 knots.

b. If one aircraft is pointed 90 degrees perpendicular to the other, the rate of closure on the beam is 500 knots. Ahead of the beam (lead) the closure is better than 500 knots. Aft of the beam (lag), it's worse and the only way to generate real closure is acceleration.

c. It stands to reason then, that if one aircraft turns at an angle less than perpendicular, that even if the other aircraft turns in lead, the rate of closure is *less* than 1000 knots.

Look at a right triangle. If the aircraft are at the hypotenuse corners, and were closing in pure pursuit on one another, the intercept would be at its fastest possible rate because the distance travelled is the smallest it can be. But if one aircraft turns away and the other turns to pursue, you're extending the amount of distance to travel, meaning that you're also extending the amount of time. Ergo, closure rate is decreased as a factor of the amount of offset.

(actually I think the only missile that's relatively well tuned in terms of kinematics is the AIM-9).

*Rage files formal complaint with ED management concerning bias* :D

It's not bias. We should have AIM-9X's.

I agree what all you guy's say. I'm not really experienced. It's very hard to grasp this Air to Air combat. And if you start to understand it more you have to actually apply it. And there it go's wrong :)

I find it extremely hard to think of al the parameters when flying without a wingman or two. And in most cases when i finally think about it they are 3 steps ahead already. I find this very frustrating. But this difficulty level makes it fun for me. But i will never be really good at this until i find somebody to train me regularly. But all these smart people intimidate me a little, so i rather learn most of it on my own first before i take the step to join a team or something. I will certainly try TACVIEW one of these day's to see what really happens.

And i hope you never think my vid's are to show off my awesome failing skills :p I just put them up for fun and it might get some people into the mood to get DCS. My casual flying might attract some people because seeing some hardcore virtual pilots fly can be really scary and intimidating.

I agree what all you guy's say. I'm not really experienced. It's very hard to grasp this Air to Air combat. And if you start to understand it more you have to actually apply it. And there it go's wrong :)

I find it extremely hard to think of al the parameters when flying without a wingman or two. And in most cases when i finally think about it they are 3 steps ahead already. I find this very frustrating. Dut this difficulty level makes it fun for me. But i will never be really good at this until i find somebody to train me regularly. But all these smart people intimidate me a little, so i rather learn most of it on my own first before i take the step to join a team or something. I will certainly try TACVIEW one of these day's to see what really happens.

And i hope you never think my vid's are to show off my awesome failing skills :p I just put them up for fun and it might get some people into the mood to get DCS. My casual flying might attract some people because seeing some hardcore virtual pilots fly can be really scary and intimidating.

Much to your surprise, it is actually HARDER flying with more people. It's just that much more to communicate and pay attention to, at least at first. All the information that you have to process by yourself, you still have to process, but in addition, now you have to pay attention to the formation, clear the other guy's six, process information from him, and do things that the flight needs. And even then it is still relatively simple.

Once you start trying to think strategically as well, everything just flies out the window and your hair catches on fire.

That being said, once you find someone to teach you the proper way of doing things, it is a fun and rewarding experience. New information suddenly become accessible, and stuff stops being so confusing every time you learn something new. Even better, you actually start to feel like you've accomplished something other than getting a kill. Plus you have someone next to you that can help make you better, even when you do kill things. At the end of the day, there is no perfect flight. You can always learn something new, and there is a certain sense of achievement in becoming better every day.

But i will never be really good at this until i find somebody to train me regularly. But all these smart people intimidate me a little, so i rather learn most of it on my own first before i take the step to join a team or something.

Then you will just develop bad habits, gets things wrong, etc. I promise. On the other hand, some people may pass their bad habits on to you.

I will certainly try TACVIEW one of these day's to see what really happens.

Very good, that's what it's for :)

And i hope you never think my vid's are to show off my awesome failing skills :p I just put them up for fun and it might get some people into the mood to get DCS. My casual flying might attract some people because seeing some hardcore virtual pilots fly can be really scary and intimidating.

No I think your videos are fun. I always evaluate things because that's what I do - I don't really know much, but I don't expect people to know much either. You enjoy the game in your way, and I'm not here to ruin your fun.