The Missiles Thread.

And I have no problem believing the AIM-120D is the king of the hill based on their multi-proven kill record of the AMRAAM 20 years ago :lol:

 

Nobody here knows the real answer, and if they did there is 0% chance they're going to tell a bunch of flight simmers.

Some of us do know the real answer, and the AIM-120 performance in game is lacking a lot. The R-27 series is lacking a lot as well though. It's even in the way that both side's missiles suck, but it would be nice for BVR combat to be able to perform BVR tactics rather than the current launch and hope while doing 270 maneuvers to go into the merge and being shot at by everyone else. The current DCS missile state doesn't allow for any sort of launch and leave low risk tactics because the missiles just suck and require a merge with some luck behind you for any kills. An AIM-120C or R-27ER shot at 10nm should not be defeated by someone head on with you turning away right as the missile launches, yet I can chase someone down at 5nm launching AMRAAMs and all it takes for them to not get hit is weaving left and right.

The missile state in DCS is very very poor, it's been complained about for many years, and there's no fix in sight.

Nice. Didn't know the Highlark had mono-pulse detection. That being said I'm willing to bet it used amplitude comparison instead of phase comparison.

You would lose the bet ;) .. even R23R missile had phase based monopulse head.

How does the R-77-1 compare with the AMRAAM (any version)? And, is there a difference between the Mica EM and the Mica RF? What about between the Super 530D and the Super 530F?

R-77 Vs AMRAAM => no clue, the thing is that no Air Force has widely fielded it. Even in Russia it isn't a best seller, from the little I know China bought some 200 with Su-30MKK or MK2 and then went to design it own Fox 3.

Mica: it's a strange beast. Both BVR and dogfight missile, and by design you can swap the seeker head between radar or IR variant.

Engine has a high and short impulse, and thrust vectoring for close range (the missile can make a 180° + Lock On After Launch to chase a target in the 6 o'clock: demonstrated by Rafale twice Vs drone target.)

The BVR Range is probably not as much as AIM-120C.

Yet Taiwan performed a test where it destroyed a traget 40Nm away. It's probably a high altitude supersonic scenario.

- Radar variant: Called Mica EM (Electro-Magnétique) in French and Mica RF for export (Radio Frequency). => It's the same.

- IR variant: called Mica IR, easy :D

It's an Imaging Infra Red seeker, meaning it does "see" an IR picture of the whole target, not just the hot spots. It's much more efficient to reject decoys.

The IR seeker can be linked to HMCS, but it can also be used in BVR with LOAL. The missile body still has the fighter=> missile datalink.

Mica VL is the vertically launched SAM version, can use both seekers.

Mica EM/ RF seeker has been used for Aster 15/ 30 SAM. It's also the base of METEOR seeker. But I think I read that they are working to replace it with more advanced seeker.

For the record, most Aster 15/ 30 firing test resulted in direct impact on target. So even if the warhead was removed to try to save the target, it was lost anyway.

The seeker seems to work ok :music_whistling:

Super 530F: it was designed for use with Mirage F1. The seeker uses LPRF.

Super 530D: improvement of Super 530F design. New seeker to work with HPRF radar (RDI) and bigger engine to increase speed & range.

Meteor range: it's funny to see to see all the US "experts" looking down on Meteor superior range & NEZ, while USA launched the AIM-120D with improved range after the Meteor :music_whistling:

Plus, western nations are heading toward network centric warfare. With its 2 way datalink, the Meteor is perfectly adapted for that.

Anyway, European Meteor clients already have AIM-120C/ Mica EM and advanced Fox 2, (ASRAAM, Mica IR, Iris-T, AIM-9X).

France is also working on 2nd generation Mica.

Is it the jack of all trades ? Probably not. But at least it's the master of two: long range & No Escape Zone.

I wouldn't like to be in Flanker Vs any "Euro-Canard" fitted with Meteor :music_whistling:

R-77-1 Vs AMRAAM => no clue, the thing is that no Air Force has widely fielded it. Even in Russia it isn't a best seller, from the little I know China bought some 200 with Su-30MKK or MK2 and then went to design it own Fox 3.

not true, jojo

1) there's no such missile as R-77-1

2) Russia has been massively exporting a missile called RVV-AE (factory name "Izdelie 170E" or "product 170E") to China, India, Algiers, Venezuela, Vietnam, Indonesia, Syria, Malaysia since mid '90s and up to current date

3) Local version of RVV-AE (called R-77, factory name "Izdelie 170") entered service in mid '90s as well, but indeed it wasn't massively fielded in our air force, since in reality it didn't suit MoD's requirements

4) there is a new missile which still doesn't have name, but it has factory index "Izdelie 170-1" (or "product 170-1") which is a deeply reworked variant of R-77, but in this case it does suit MoD's requirements. it's being massively produced since ~2012, and we're seeing it in our air force.

Thanks a whole lot, jojo! So, the Mica is a better choice for WVR than the Magic II, right?

ZHeN, I believe there is. It's also called the RVV-SD, and it's a longer range version of the R-77.

RVV-SD is an export version of "Izd. 170-1", which still hasn't seen light yet (since no export orders for it), so it's just a picture in commercials

again, there's no missile called R-77-1

btw, there's no Su-30SM1 as well.

Thanks a whole lot, jojo! So, the Mica is a better choice for WVR than the Magic II, right?

A lot better in WVR, and it will also be a nasty thing in BVR (no warning on target's RWR).

not true, jojo

1) there's no such missile as R-77-1

2) Russia has been massively exporting a missile called RVV-AE (factory name "Izdelie 170-1E") to China, India, Algiers, Venezuela, Vietnam, Indonesia, Syria, Malaysia since mid '90s and up to current date

3) Local version of RVV-AE (called R-77, factory name "Izdelie 170") entered service in mid '90s as well, but indeed it wasn't massively fielded in our air force, since in reality it didn't suit MoD's requirements

4) there is a new missile which still doesn't have name, but it has factory index "Izdelie 170-1" (or "product 170-1) which is a deeply reworked variant of R-77, but in this case it does suit MoD's requirements. it's being massively produced since ~2012, and we're seeing it in our air force.

Ok, sorry but Russian designation is complicated for western guys :D

But like I said, exports to China were limited compared to the size of their Flanker fleet.

And it rises the questions:

- Why "Izdelie 170" wasn't suitable for Russian Air Force and attracted so few interest from China?

- What has been re-worked on "Izdelie 170-1"

- If "Izdelie 170-1" is being "massively produced since ~2012", why did the Russians Su-30SM originally deployed in Syria only with R-27 ?

We didn't spot R-77 before the Russian Su-24 has been shot down by Turkish Air Force...

(please anyone don't derail the thread about this incident, I'm not taking any side here).

AIM-120 began to be fielded in early 1990', Mica EM from 1997.

Transition from Fox 1 to Fox 3 should have been a priority for Russian AF.

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

http://aviationweek.com/awin-only/japan-britain-collaborate-meteor-guidance

Britain and Japan intend to cooperatively research improvements for the MBDA Meteor, raising the possibility of combining that air-to-air missile’s ramjet propulsion and range with an advanced electronically scanned seeker.

...

The program is likely to focus on the guidance technology in the Mitsubishi Electric AAM-4B air-to-air missile, which entered production in 2010 to equip Japanese Boeing F-15s and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries’s F-2s. Britain has sought "advanced sensor technology" from Japanese companies, says the Japan Times.

 

 

The AAM-4B seeker with an active, electronically scanned array (AESA), that should significantly outperform radars with mechanically scanned antennas used in other missiles of medium-and long-range, including the Meteor.

Britain is the lead contractor for Meteor program.

But like I said, exports to China were limited compared to the size of their Flanker fleet.

globally, they weren't limited

Chinese - yeah, they bought some for copypasting

- Why "Izdelie 170" wasn't suitable for Russian Air Force ?

main version (there's still no official version) - R-77's performance wasn't good enough for MoD RF

but I think the fact they were broke in the mid 90s played the most

and attracted so few interest from China?

I already answered above

- What has been re-worked on "Izdelie 170-1" ?

well, almost everything ... R-77 was originally produced in Ukraine, so they had to switch from Ukrainian parts first

there is no detail on "170-1" (not even a name) on the internet... since it's for russian military - classified

but you can find some commercial data on its export variant - RVV-SD:

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/567/

- If "Izdelie 170-1" is being "massively produced since ~2012", why did the Russians Su-30SM originally deployed in Syria only with R-27 ?

that's Su-30SM issue. Izd. 170-1 has been officially integrated into its weapons management system only in january 2018 (earlier it was only ready for R-77 and RVV-AE)

In the case of China export, when I said "limited", I wasn't implying that Russia wouldn't sell more, but China only purchased very few compared to their fleet.

Indeed reverse engineering may be a good explanation for that.

that's Su-30SM issue. Izd. 170-1 has been officially integrated into its weapons management system only in january 2018 (earlier it was only ready for R-77 and RVV-AE)

Just for clarity, crossing what I found and what you're saying:

- Izd. 170 = R-77: AA-12 (NATO name)

- Izd. 190 = RVV-AE: export variant of Izd. 170. But you're saying Izd. 170E ?

- Izd. 170-1 = R-77-1 (unofficial name): Izd. 170 upgraded and stripped of Ukrainians components, heavier, with longer body and increased range (probably bigger engine)

- RVV-SD = Export variant of Izd. 170-1

But you're saying Izd. 170E ?

:doh:

you caught me there :)

right, Izd. 190

- Izd. 170-1 = R-77-1 (unofficial name): Izd. 170 upgraded and stripped of Ukrainians components, heavier, with longer body and increased range (probably bigger engine)

I don't think those are the only changes

most probably new seeker, new tracking modes, greater pitbull range, greater NEZ, HOJ most probable, home on radiation - less probable, fusion with aircraft's passive sensors - just my guess

there are three variants of seeker, and no info which of them is actually used in current 170-1 for RuAF:

http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/p27/9b1103m.shtml

http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/rvv-cd/9b-1103m-200pa.shtml

http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/rvv-cd/9b-1103m-200ps.shtml

I got a question: Are there any datalinked missiles in reality? I mean missiles that communicate with each other and thus are able to cover a larger area when fired at the same time.

E.g. when you shoot an AMRAAM from a long range your opponent only needs to change its course by 45° to bleed out the energy of that missile. But if two AMRAAMS are fired together they could cover a greater area and thus would not need to make big course correction when the target changes its direction.

Yep, LRASM comes to mind. It's a very new thing.

Air to air missiles, no.

If I understood correctly that is only an anti-ship-missile. So it does not have the same problem I was mentioning before, because ships are too slow to bleed out that missile by changing their course. Also the weapon datalink of the LRASM seems to link it only with its missile launching platform.

I am more interested in missiles that can automatically communicate with each other. That would be very interesting.

But maybe this kind of weapon is currently top secret. Hopefully I do not get targeted by the CIA now because of posting this. :D

I think you should look into it a little deeper - there's a lot more to it than 'only an anti-ship missile'. LRASM communicates with the other LRASMs once in autonomous/terminal mode (or at least it's supposed to). No AAM does that. At best, you have very new versions of AMRAAM that can deal with a datalink that's not from their own launch platform, but from a large network like Link-16 etc.

As for your energy problem, that's easy enough to solve: Bigger/longer lasting rocket motor (like METEOR) or shoot closer. No one really shoots AAMs at max range if they want effective weapon fires.

No one really shoots AAMs at max range if they want effective weapon fires.

Except maybe the AI in DCS. :D

Ok, of course in real life nobody would launch a missile from the maximum range, but datalinked missile would be still deadlier than single missiles I think. Today's computing power is growing very fast, but I have a feeling that real life missiles do not benefit very much from this.

They have a data-link to the launching platform, well, modern missiles that is. And yes, computing power has benefits in many areas: Sensor processing, ECCM and other countre-measure rejection, trajectory shaping etc.

Yep, LRASM comes to mind. It's a very new thing.

P-700 "Granit" comes to mind - not so very new a thing :)

Oh yep, you're right - makes sense too. Much larger missiles, much more space for equipment of that time. :D

Oh yep, you're right - makes sense too. Much larger missiles, much more space for equipment of that time. :D

Heh yeah.

Hello everyone, I wanted to know if there is any comparative table of range and speeds of all the different missiles in DCS.

The problem with DCS missiles is that they are not factoring their own planned rates of deceleration into their trajectory planning.

Anyone can observe this with a scenario where a target is 90* offset [traveling perpendicular] to the launch aircraft and set options "reaction to threat: none" Launch the missile and watch it manuever very little until its propellant is expended. During the deceleration phase the missiles all begin turning (bleeding energy) which becomes more and more pronounced as the missile gets slower.

This rate of deceleration is capable of being calculated, especially against a non-manuevering target. Even a rough attempt at doing so would improve the range and pk of missiles in dcs dramatically.

A dark horse for this discussion:

Japan's AAM-4B missile, the worlds first missile to incorporate an AESA seeker.

Western manufacturers found this so interesting that MBDA already are in talks with Mitsubishi Electric to get some of that action.

Little is known about the AAM-4B. It is likely to be a heavier and larger missile than the AIM-120C. That's about all I know as I couldn't find much data on it over the years.