Jump to content

Defeating an AIM-54C


Recommended Posts

Can someone explain to me why a RWR system would detect a missle launch from a STT lock, but wont from a TWS lock? Sorry if its kind of off-topic. I understand how the different modes work, but Im not really sure how RWR works I guess. (Waiting for F15C for my first taste of Air to Air combat)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most basic ideas:

 

You have a nail (radar in search mode) + M-link signal, but you don't know who it's pointed at (TWS launch)

 

STT + Waveform change (needed for some missiles) trips missile launch warning

 

STT + M-Link (he has you locked, and suddenly there's an M-link! I wonder why) trips missile launch warning.

 

STT from known ARH missile radar trips missile launch warning.

 

STT alone (because we don't know how that radar behaves) trips STT warning ... or maybe it's doesn't, that's actually configurable according to an AF's philosophy.

 

 

In short, what the game does is a guess, since we don't necessarily know what exactly happens in RL and why. In-game you will get the missile launch warning if:

1) STT + Missile is launched

2) ARH missile locks you.

 

Can someone explain to me why a RWR system would detect a missle launch from a STT lock, but wont from a TWS lock? Sorry if its kind of off-topic. I understand how the different modes work, but Im not really sure how RWR works I guess. (Waiting for F15C for my first taste of Air to Air combat)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oldie but Goodie!

 

 

Aim-54c

 

This video looks very nice... But unfortunately it is not for me. For the past few days, I have been trying to duplicate what he did in the video, but almost with no success. For the (very) few times that I succeeded, Phoenix stupidly followed chaffs, which occurs rarely... I think now I have close to 100 deaths by Phoenix.

 

It seems that without substantially reducing its energy by dragging it either down or in a zig-zag fashion, it is close to impossible to evade Phoenix. As someone has pointed out in this thread, it does not make sense keeping the lock on F14 at this distance. So I am free to do any maneuver, and defeating Phoenix suddenly becomes so easy...

 

Just to clarify, for the few successes that I mentioned above, none of them was without substantial maneuvers before and during the course. So in this sense I have never succeeded in my trying.

 

I suspect that, since the video was made with FC2(?), effectiveness of missiles such as Phoenix has been improved in FC3, and that may be the source of my frustration.. If possible, can some of you kind souls duplicate what happened in the youtube video, preferably in Su-27, and upload the trk file here? I would love to learn it... It seemed so easy, effortless, yet effective.


Edited by blackbelter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^

you can't achieve what was shown in that video unless you disengage ECM. The point of entire tutorial is to make sure that incoming missile is in lead intercept. ECM keeps the incoming misslile in pure pursuit, pointed directly at you...


Edited by Vekkinho

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... which is incorrect and this advice won't work when/if it is fixed. :)

 

Not claiming that such a thing will happen any time soon, either ... but any addition of capability like an INS for the missile or a long memory time-out for the launcher, and if combined with a more realistic ECM simulation will have you wishing you were fighting an AIM-54A instead.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... which is incorrect and this advice won't work when/if it is fixed. :)

 

Not claiming that such a thing will happen any time soon, either ... but any addition of capability like an INS for the missile or a long memory time-out for the launcher, and if combined with a more realistic ECM simulation will have you wishing you were fighting an AIM-54A instead.

 

What do you mean? I just said how it performs ATM with FC, not in reality...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now. ECM shouldn't even be on if you're not STTed on, and even if that, the missile can fly navigation based on last known good data and update as necessary if possible.

 

The missile should never be trying to fly pure pursuit, PN should be the minimum.

 

My point is, this stuff is not right at this time, and while I don't think it will be changed soon, I believe it will be changed eventually.

 

 

PS: Having said that, you're right, I don't mean to detract from what you've said, which does work in-game right now.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you mean and there's this thing that really gives my nerves a go when I look at the ACMI tracks. F

 

For instance, You jam around and the enemy takes a Fox 1 shot, missile gets closer and it' doesn't burn thru like it should but remains in pure intercept throughout it's entire flight...

 

I mean, it's onboard radar is weaker that the platform's, however at the distance of 2-3 nm average AIM-120C should go lead on you with current FC ECM logic.

 

IRL it should be in lead since it leaves the rail...


Edited by Vekkinho

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is with how you process the jamming signal.

 

If you think about just a noise jamming signal, it is a point source - like in the game, and you can go PN on it just like against a heat source.

 

If your range is not being jammed, you can use APN which causes the missile to effectively fly to a collision point instead of maneuvering to maintain sight angle (the range and closure information correct pure PN if you look at the math of it).

 

If you (successfully) employ a different time of jamming, eg. range gate stealer or angle + range noise, you will break the offending radar's lock. This would result in your scope basically filling with targets, and this type of jamming is usually just a burst to break the lock. F-18's use this type of jamming (that I know of, they may use more techniques :) )

I'm not sure if the range gate stealer would look like anything at all, but it might look like your radar target suddenly 'warps' away and then the lock is broken.

 

There are other techniques as well, like ground-bounce, cross-eyed jamming (not used much because of the difficulty of creating an accurate wavefront - AFAIK) etc.

 

Most importantly, these self-protection jammers almost never fire without an STT on them, and when they do fire, they jam the 'highest threat', or the number of threats they can jam (eg. some jammers can do just 2 threats, others 6/hemisphere, others 2/quadrant, etc).

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
Why USAF removed this weapon? If reality is alike DCS, it is much more lethal than AIM-120.

The AIM-120 might not be perfectly represented in DCS.

 

However you still have a point. I think cost (to buy the weapon but also to keep it working) might have been too high or maybe it was unreliable (faulty electronic...).

 

There are a lot of parameters that should be taken into account when assessing the efficiency of a weapon system. Only a few of these parameters are accurately described in DCS. For instance you will never see a weapon malfunction in DCS. It would be too frustrating for the player if it was implemented. The side effect is that for old weapon systems the performances may be higher in DCS than IRL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which weapon, the AIM-7?

 

They removed it because the AIM-120 is a much more modern, lethal, and efficient weapon.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why USAF removed this weapon? If reality is alike DCS, it is much more lethal than AIM-120.

So you bumped a topic from 4 years ago?

The aim-54 is not perfect like dcs make's him look like

 

(The A version) had non solid state electronics

 

*it cant really hit something maneuvering like a fighter it was meant against bombers only

 

Its super heavy at almost 500kg which means limited number of this can be carried

 

It can work only with the f-14 radar (and was first meant to be in the f-111 but it didnt worked out)

 

His standoff range (pitbull) was "only" 11 miles. For his size and weight its nothing

 

Oh and i forgot the cost

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you bumped a topic from 4 years ago?

The aim-54 is not perfect like dcs make's him look like

 

(The A version) had non solid state electronics[/quote[

 

... and so was susceptible to all kinds of ECM.

 

*it cant really hit something maneuvering like a fighter it was meant against bombers only
Yes it can.

 

Its super heavy at almost 500kg which means limited number of this can be carried
6 is plenty :)

 

It can work only with the f-14 radar (and was first meant to be in the f-111 but it didnt worked out)

 

His standoff range (pitbull) was "only" 11 miles. For his size and weight its nothing

 

Oh and i forgot the cost

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Standoff range depends on the target. And keep in mind that the switch to solid state electronics and a plate antenna would increase that range as well. In any case, it was a missile with a very specific mission; it's launch platform was retired, so no point to keep the missile.

 

Except for NASA, who shoot that thing from their F-15, so, where's my AIM-54C on my eagle! :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same way you evade all missiles: be at a lower altitude than it is, put it on the 3-9 line, chaff. You just have to be fast and accurate, because it is a very fast missile. So, depending on where that F-14 is, you might want to get into a defensive position well before you get the launch warning.

 

I was searching the forum for some tip to evade it...I'm always shot down by the AIM-54 :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the question, so I'll give an answer that I hope explains a couple of things:

 

Missiles don't use Link-4,16, or whatever. (There may be some VERY new versions of 120's that do, but I doubt it). The don't receive information from AWACS or SAMs or wingmen. Period.

 

The missile data-link comes strictly from the launching aircraft.

That launching aircraft may receive data from other sources (ie. all of this above stuff) and then pass that data onto the missile it is launching via M-Link.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...