Ракеты в DCS

ну было б правильнее подавать в русскоязычной ветке с переводом (можно машинным) :)

Well, it would be more correct to serve in the Russian-language branch with translation (possible machine) :)

Ну по-хорошему необходимо дублирование, т.к. даже чисто по трудозатратам если человек сам свой текст в переводчик забьет - это будет один раз, другое дело, если всем читающим этот пост придётся переводить :)

А уж знающим русский язык как бы вообще в обязательном порядке дублировать надо :)

ОК, на русском.

Я не увидел от тебя хорошей аргументации низкой эффективности Р-27ЕР. Эффективность очень сильно зависит от дальности и противодействия противника. Когда цель летит прямо и не противодействует, эффективность у всех ракет близка к 1. Но если цель активно уклоняется и использует контрмеры, эффективность будет стремиться к нулю. Это касается всех ракет.

As Frostie told you, the probability for ER-27 compare to AIM-120 going for countermeasures is way to predictable for ER-27/IR. Ill send you tracks as I get time. Not first time. The result is that a missile fired is not respected and you dont simulate the reaction you would get from a pilot if a missile was a threat. In that way you are not simulating it properly since you dont get the effect of the pilots. If you would chopp of the hand if they get hit then pilots would react more, But we simulate a combat so we need to make the missiles hit in order to get a reaction.

We evade 1000 missiles everyday, Its not like in RL, for that reason ED need to compensate for our overwhelming knowledge about missiles performance in DCS.

Thats where we grow apart, we take data from MP and you from SP. Ill do the test with AI and Player so we can compare results.

How usefull are the statistics from Ethiopia?

 

Is it known if they where fired within parameters, and if the missiles were supported until they could reach their target?

No, it's not really known, other than R-27s did a poor job and R-73s did a good job.

No one takes these stats very seriously - it's not that you shouldn't consider them at all, but as you've pointed out: the lack of knowledge relating to the engagements and a couple other factors make the reports less reliable. There is knowledge related to AIM-7/9/120 from actual use that is far more in depth (but never near to the knowledge of the actual forces that use them).

It is also why this gets mentioned whenever Tek refers to his own made up, incomplete or uninformed statistics.

When two factions with the same SARH weapon fight against each other, it seems unlikely that they will go for the kill with each missile fired, as they have the same range that the enemy has. Chances are about 50/50 to get killed when both launch under the same conditions and do similar maneuvers. This seems like a risk not worth taking.

You're thinking air-quake, which has zero relation to real air combat. In fact, DCS BVR has only very superficial relation to real air combat - in the sense of tactics used, as well as the equipment.

What surprise me is that you put so low probability for ER comapre to Aim-120 vs Players. 100% for ER to miss and 50% for Aim-120B, Aim-120C 0% probability to miss :) plz take note in that this is simulator and pilots are not reacting if the probability is to low, that is because we evade them so many times and learn to exploit instead of play tactically.

I hope new flight model for Er-27 can improve the guidance to 30% in MP. ( so no matter chaff or good notch there should be some probability to hit. As it is now with Aim-120B/C

Where you take this statistics?

I have seen players evade from AIM-120C.

Ill show you in Track.

Is this not new ER/R-27 Version, I think it has new fuse sensors ;)

This is stats from MP server, This pilots is very good in Su-27, Thats where my 14% come from. When we have 1000 missiles fired you can make a judgment on %. R-73 have very low hit rate but in J-11 R-77 is compensating for that.

So chaffs create a radar screen, then how can the Aim-120 in DCS track the target through 30 of those radar screens?

I maneuver after deploying 30 chaffs directly between me and the missile, and the missile instantly follows my movement.

Isn't that a very optimistic modelling of the seeker?

With a target completely hidden behind a thick cover of 30 chaffs any guidance algorithm in the seeker can hardly do anything more than tell the missile to stay on the last known intercept heading and hope for the target to show up again.

I assume that in the tailchase scenario the chaff effectiveness is still depending on the ECCM value in the missile config, but maybe in this case the difference between the different missiles is too strong.

It was said that in a tailchase + chaff scenario the chaff can completely screen the target. So behind a wall of many chaffs the seeker will not see the target, even if it is more modern.

With different target aspects (e.g. notching bandit) the seeker still gets a return from the target and can use its advanced processing to follow the return of the target instead of a chaff, but if there is no return at all then even the Aim-120 should lose the target. The advanced processing does not help when there is no return, and so the advantage of the Aim-120 should not be as big as in other situations.

Maybe in a tailchase situation the ECCM values could be scaled with an exponential function (e.g. ECCM_tailchase = e^(-1/ECCM) ) to get rid of this huge discrepancy of seeker behaviour.

So chaffs create a radar screen, then how can the Aim-120 in DCS track the target through 30 of those radar screens?

So here's the answer you're NOT looking for:

I maneuver after deploying 30 chaffs directly between me and the missile, and the missile instantly follows my movement.

 

Isn't that a very optimistic modelling of the seeker?

No, because it isn't modeling a seeker.

It's a generic CM rejection function which is influenced by a few factors. There are no physics here, it's a die roll based on some real physical things ... but unfortunately, it isn't nuanced quite enough.

It would be nice if ED could consider at least a CM rejection update or rewrite, though modelling a more accurate EM environment would be even more desirable.

At the same time, all of this complexity will be difficult to manage without throwing more stuff out into multi-core processing. A single missile isn't a real burden, maybe 10 aren't either ... but with this much decision-making, getting the missile paths to appear the same for everyone in MP now becomes quite a bit harder, and that as you know is also something that has not been addressed.

It is certainly possible to patch some stuff into the current CM rejection logic to help, and maybe it would even be enough - this still requires additional logic on the part of the missile in order to differentiate missiles from each other, and the main two things here would be the fuze modeling and missile memory and logic circuits relating to switching from track to search and back.

This stuff is sort of modeled now on a very basic level, and it needs to become just a bit better. All of this starts pushing the pure 'die roll' CM rejection model out.

None of it is really simple to deal with.

А по РУССКИ можно ?

Уже был вопрос с этим экранированием и этот коэффициент был значительно снижен - кому он не даёт покоя не могу понять - хотя могу. От ЭР уже давно никто не отворачивает в сети, а я помню концепцию Чиж свою предлагал в ГС2 с кругами и 3-9, когда кадушку отключили. Игроки все опошлили, светлые замыслы похоронены. А теперь хотят ещё и с разворота хвосты у себя снимать, а то квейка маловато ;).

Например что фильтрует ракеты с АРГСН если облако ДО делает засвет для ГСН, закрывая цель и цели для ракеты нет - куда ей лететь - хорошо по памяти. Да там облако рассеивается и цель уже просвечивает - и получаются варианты - через какой момент рассеивания отфильтрует, какое время займёт, где в этот момент будет ракета, довернёт или выйдет уже цель за углы обзора и ничего этого не известно, в том числе из документов... Но в результате мы имеем 100% экранирование для одного типа ракет и полное игнорирование данного эффекта другими ракетами.

Well it is still a way of "modelling", although extremely simplistic. I am fully aware that the seeker behaviour when chaffs are deployed only depends on a few things (propability of defeat mainly seems to depend on aspect, speed, lookdown yes/no and ECCM)

No matter the situation, the difference in chaff effectivenes under each situation seems to be always the same between the missiles (simply depending on the ECCM value). But in the tailchase the missiles should maybe suffer a little more equally.

An easy improvement would be the proposed nonlinear scaling of the ECCM-value in a tailchase.

А по РУССКИ можно ?

К сожалению, разработчики ED редко отвечают на английском форуме. (Google Translate)

Unfortunately ED developers rarely respond in the english forum. Here they seem to be a little more active.

1-3 chaff is often enough to defeat the R-27 in the tailchase, but the Aim-120 needs 30+.

When the chaff creates a pretty much solid screen, then the Aim-120 should not be able to track targets covered by a row of 30 of those screens. Even if it has a better radar and better processing.

In this case the Aim-120 seems overestimated.

Тут я вижу одну очевидную проблему. Некоторым игрокам кажется что эффективность ракет Р-27 занижена, но никакой подтвержденной информации что это правильно/неправильно нет. Только спекуляции и домыслы.

__________________

Here I see one obviously issue. It seems to some players that the effectiveness of the R-27 missiles is underestimated, but there is no confirmed information that this is right / wrong. Only speculations.

По мне тут есть не только неправильное поведение (см. "Экранирование" ДО радарного излучения, увод р-27 на те же ДО при нотчинге противника), но и геймплейные: р27р реально плохи, являясь единственной радарной ракетой для су27 и су33.

Вы же сами несколько страниц назад говорили что повысили эфективность ХАРМов после жалоб игроков что нипападают-ниубивают. Тут такая же ситуацияи с р-27р. Из-за крайне неэффективных ракет в мультиплеере большенству красных пилотов приходится пытаться незамеченными облетать в хвост противнику для скрытой атаки 27т через ОЛС. И это становится единственной рабочей тактикой. А ведь у тех же 27ер максимальная дальность больше амраамовских.

Из последних моих ощущений: неделю назад летал на Growling Sidewinder сервере на су27. Поймал харриера на нулях в 10-15км летевшего от меня. Три 27ер - все три в молоко. Трек к сожалению уже не найду.

Даже если документальных доказательств нет (а их быть и не может тк ракета на вооружении и данные засекречены), то есть наблюдение геймплейных проблем. Никто не просит давать лишние секунды работы двигателя или убер маневренность. Уверен, что есть параметры, которые так или иначе могут улучшить качество геймплея при использовании этих ракет

Нет нет нет. Давайте не скатывается в сторону апнуть/нерфить.

Для этого есть танки и другой всякий шлак.

Да даже насчет хармов противоречиво.

Пусть не попадают так даже лучше. Это только молодняк наверное заходит в dcs снести все с одного захода.

Вот видишь Андрей ты создал прецедент насчет хармов и тыкают этим.

А что если дальше все начнут про другое вооружение говорить "не попадаем не убиваем" ,тоже его улучшать???

Это скользкая дорожка.... Андрей возвращай эффективность хармов и пусть будет как оно должно быть, а не как это требуют отдельные пилоты ради пиу пиу мультиплеер а..