2 Major Problems With Russian Fighters in DCS

To whom it may concern,

My name is ALPHA, and I have been playing FC for long time and most of the time as MIG-29S fighter, and have notice the following two major problems related to Russian fighter targeting and weapon systems:

1-I have noticed that EOS of the flankers and the MIG are not practical and unrealistic since it can detect a IR signature of a air craft from more than 200 km away. Such a EOS system is unrealistic and impractical. According to the following source, the EOS (KOLS and OLS) of the MIG and Flankers has a range of no more than 12-18 km for a non-afterburning fighter head-on and 50 km in pursuit engagement, and scanning limits are +/- 30 degrees azimuth, and -15/+30 degrees in elevation. And

Please refer to the first link 1/3 and 1/2 of a page down.

Link 1:

http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/philez/Su-15TM%20PICTURES%20&%20DOCS/Overscan%27s%20guide%20to%20Russian%20Military%20Avionics.htm

2- I also noticed the R-77 gives missile lunch warning to an air craft at the range of 80 km as soon as it leaves the MIG-29. Again, such a thing is Not practical and needs to be fixed, because the enemy air craft can only get a lunch warning if the seeker of R-77 goes active, and seeker of R-77 does not have the power nor capability to detect and pit-bull on a target at 80 km. The detection range of the R-77 seeker is no more than ~15 km at target with typical RCS (radar cross section) of 3m square.

Keep in mind, active missiles like AIM-120 and R-77 relays on the radar of the fighter as to where the target is located, heading, altitude, speed, and direction. If the fighter of which fired AIM-120 or R-77 loses the lock, the missile uses inertial navigation system based on last information that were given by the radar of the fighter (heading, speed, altitude, direction), and once missile knows its relatively close to the target it will go active, and homes on the target regardless of friend or foe.

Please refer to the following second link 1/2 page down, (seeker chart):

Link 2:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html

I hope developers of FC3 address these issues.

Thank you for your consideration.

1-I have noticed that EOS of the flankers and the MIG are not practical and unrealistic since it can detect a IR signature of a air craft from more than 200 km away. Such a EOS system is unrealistic and impractical. According to the following source, the EOS (KOLS and OLS) of the MIG and Flankers has a range of no more than 12-18 km for a non-afterburning fighter head-on and 50 km in pursuit engagement, and scanning limits are +/- 30 degrees azimuth, and -15/+30 degrees in elevation. And

Thing is, those guys are afterburning for sure that you see beyond 50 km. I'm not sure how realistic it is to see them from 200-300 km though.

2- I also noticed the R-77 gives missile lunch warning to an air craft at the range of 80 km as soon as it leaves the MIG-29. Again, such a thing is Not practical and needs to be fixed, because the enemy air craft can only get a lunch warning if the seeker of R-77 goes active, and seeker of R-77 does not have the power nor capability to detect and pit-bull on a target at 80 km. The detection range of the R-77 seeker is no more than ~15 km at target with typical RCS (radar cross section) of 3m square.

 

Keep in mind, active missiles like AIM-120 and R-77 relays on the radar of the fighter as to where the target is located, heading, altitude, speed, and direction. If the fighter of which fired AIM-120 or R-77 loses the lock, the missile uses inertial navigation system based on last information that were given by the radar of the fighter (heading, speed, altitude, direction), and once missile knows its relatively close to the target it will go active, and homes on the target regardless of friend or foe.

I'm fairly sure you have to be in STT in the MiG to launch a R-77, so it makes sense to give away the warning. It works the same for the slammer, if you fire in STT he'll get the warning immediately.

The Mig should be able to launch an R77 in TWS (dual targetting capability).

Ye, unfortunately it doesn't work ingame.

Not a Mig driver but I thought it now did...

I don't drive it either, but from what I've heard from my friends who fly it, it still doesn't work.

TWS has always been a feature of the MiG-29 in all versions of FC. FC3 however introduced an additional mode called TWS2 in the MiG-29S, this allows 2 targets to be locked and engaged. Unfortunately in game at least it doesn't represent a true 'Track While Scan' as it gives off a warning when launched the same as it would in STT mode.

This is probably because it is a very basic work around to give the MiG-29S an ability to multi-target.

2- I also noticed the R-77 gives missile lunch warning to an air craft at the range of 80 km as soon as it leaves the MIG-29. Again, such a thing is Not practical and needs to be fixed, because the enemy air craft can only get a lunch warning if the seeker of R-77 goes active, and seeker of R-77 does not have the power nor capability to detect and pit-bull on a target at 80 km. The detection range of the R-77 seeker is no more than ~15 km at target with typical RCS (radar cross section) of 3m square.

 

Keep in mind, active missiles like AIM-120 and R-77 relays on the radar of the fighter as to where the target is located, heading, altitude, speed, and direction. If the fighter of which fired AIM-120 or R-77 loses the lock, the missile uses inertial navigation system based on last information that were given by the radar of the fighter (heading, speed, altitude, direction), and once missile knows its relatively close to the target it will go active, and homes on the target regardless of friend or foe.

 

Please refer to the following second link 1/2 page down, (seeker chart):

 

Link 2:

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html

 

I hope developers of FC3 address these issues.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

If locked in STT mode the launch warning will be the same as R-27R SARH because like the SARH missile it is the radar from the MiG that is emitting the lock/launch signal.

Only when an ARH goes active does the RWR then switch to the missiles radar rather than the aircrafts radar being the primary threat.

No launch from the aircrafts radar would be achieved by using TWS, this is not standard STT mode, with TWS you're relying on programming the ARH to fly to a designated spot in the sky. Rather than locking and tracking a target you're radar is tracking several and displaying the info to you in a delayed updated display, when you lock a target in TWS you're selecting which one of those images your missile is flying to rather than locking full radar on a contact for a complete real time guidance. This is only possible with ARH because the ARH has its own radar, it requires this to achieve the kill because the delay from TWS would probably make a SARH shot miss amongst other reasons.

In FC1 and FC2 MiGs only ever had STT to engage with, now in FC3 they have TWS2 as well which still falls short of what TWS actually does. Also missiles in FC don't have INS they don't go to last known locations and activate, unfortunately this is the limitation of the model at the moment. I'm sure ED know what they want to achieve in the future but I guess its a long road.

R-77 does not have a SARH capability. Its only a Active Homing missile. So even if I do lock a target in STT mode, it should not give missile lunch warning. Please refer to my second link, 1/2 page down, there are information regarding R-77 seeker.

Even what you say is true, although I lock target in TWS and TWS2 mode, it STILL give missile warning from 80 km away, which technically makes no since.

Most of the time, I engage aerial target in TWS mode, but regardless of which mode you fire R-77, it still gives missile lunch warning from more than 80 km away.

R-77 does not have a SARH capability. Its only a Active Homing missile. So even if I do lock a target in STT mode, it should not give missile lunch warning.

That's a pretty big assumption based on well, nothing :)

R-77 does not have a SARH capability. Its only a Active Homing missile. So even if I do lock a target in STT mode, it should not give missile lunch warning. Please refer to my second link, 1/2 page down, there are information regarding R-77 seeker.

 

Even what you say is true, although I lock target in TWS and TWS2 mode, it STILL give missile warning from 80 km away, which technically makes no since.

 

Most of the time, I engage aerial target in TWS mode, but regardless of which mode you fire R-77, it still gives missile lunch warning from more than 80 km away.

The seekers and related missile systems need some work. A lot of work. Aircraft systems, however, are unlikely to change until DCS versions of these aircraft come out.

At any rate, do you know or understand what criteria are required for a given system to generate a launch warning? It probably isn't as simple as this game would lead you to believe.

The situation is as good as it is probably going to get without some pretty descriptive information that no one is likely to get their hands on.

Real aircraft might not even have launch warnings depending on the platform or weapon being employed.

That's a pretty big assumption based on well, nothing :)

Its not a assumption, look at the link that I have posted, and I did mentioned it many times that what I say here is the fact based on Russian sources and their research.

Unless, you have a better source of information regarding this topic that would like to share it with us. :)

You cant just comparer AIM-120 with R-77. They both have lots in common, but they are not the same.

It is a pretty big assumption, and you're not basing it on anything that is useful. Where does it mention RWR detection modes and missile launch determination modes, vs. radar missile launch modes etc? That's right, nowhere.

No one cares much about Carlo Kopp's stuff especially when it comes to missiles. And FYI, there is zero reason to believe that a radar in STT acts different for a SARH vs an ARH missile when launching them. The missile seeker doesn't necessarily impact what the radar is doing.

Its not a assumption, look at the link that I have posted, and I did mentioned it many times that what I say here is the fact based on Russian sources and their research.

 

Unless, you have a better source of information regarding this topic that would like to share it with us. :)

 

You cant just comparer AIM-120 with R-77. They both have lots in common, but they are not the same.

 

At any rate, do you know or understand what criteria are required for a given system to generate a launch warning? It probably isn't as simple as this game would lead you to believe.

 

The situation is as good as it is probably going to get without some pretty descriptive information that no one is likely to get their hands on.

 

Real aircraft might not even have launch warnings depending on the platform or weapon being employed.

This game does not make me to believe in any thing. I believe in common-sense, research, and proven information I get. I do believe both the air crafts and the weapon system needs lot of work.

This game is a type of Simulation, which means we have to make it as real as we can based on proven information.

So you have documentation on what an RWR can determine, what it cannot determine, and/or documentation on the radar's signals based on a given mode? :)

This game is a type of Simulation, which means we have to make it as real as we can based on proven information.

It is a pretty big assumption, and you're not basing it on anything that is useful. Where does it mention RWR detection modes and missile launch determination modes, vs. radar missile launch modes etc? That's right, nowhere.

 

No one cares much about Carlo Kopp's stuff especially when it comes to missiles. And FYI, there is zero reason to believe that a radar in STT acts different for a SARH vs an ARH missile when launching them. The missile seeker doesn't necessarily impact what the radar is doing.

This is not about RWR, its abut common sense. Are you suggesting that it make seance to have a ARH warning from 80 km away, when seeker detection range is no more than 15 km??

"there is zero reason to believe that a radar in STT acts different for a SARH vs an ARH missile"

Well, this site assumes that you do understand the concept behind SARH vs. ARH. Also look at the chart in 1/2 page down for R-77 its has ARH\DL\IMU system for guidance. In fact, I did mention that regardless of which radar mode you fire R-77, (TWS, TWS2, and STT) it still gives missile lunch warning.

"No one cares much about Carlo Kopp's stuff especially when it comes to missiles"

Well, maybe its time for you to care, I mean you are ED moderator and tester, right ???

Cuz, some of the stuff in ED start to fall out of common-seance,

FYI, I'll be more than happy to discuss this matter over Team speak.

This is not about RWR, its abut common sense. Are you suggesting that it make seance to have a ARH warning from 80 km away, when seeker detection range is no more than 15 km??

When you are launching in STT? Yes.

Well, this site assumes that you do understand the concept behind SARH vs. ARH. Also look at the chart in 1/2 page down for R-77 its has ARH\DL\IMU system for guidance. In fact, I did mention that regardless of which radar mode you fire R-77, (TWS, TWS2, and STT) it still gives missile lunch warning.

TWS in that fighter isn't TWS in terms of guidance - it is a situational awareness mode only. You can only go into STT from that mode. TWS2 should not give any warning, and that is a bug.

Well, maybe its time for you to care, I mean you are ED moderator and tester, right ???

Cuz, some of the stuff in ED start to fall out of common-seance,

 

FYI, I'll be more than happy to discuss this matter over Team speak.

FYI, ED has far more detailed information on those systems than either you or Kopp will ever get their hands on. We know Kopp doesn't write anything useful for simulation. We have been through things like these a lot of times before, and I don't mean to be rude, but you are bringing nothing that is new to the table.

Another FYI, it has already been proven that 'common sense' is meaningless when doing realistic simulations of things you don't have data on.

So you have documentation on what an RWR can determine, what it cannot determine, and/or documentation on the radar's signals based on a given mode? :)

If you don't know this I will go in breaf over it for you,

RWR receives signals based on bands which is the range of frequencies. For missile seekers which runs in X-band, and as example if a fighter locks another aircraft in rage of 3.2 - 3.8 Ghz, the radar of that air craft moves in this rage of frequency which received by the RWR, and thats how RWR generates a different tone when you get a lock.

When missile lunches at your air craft the seeker of the missile emits power in X-band (lets say 3.8- 4.6 Ghz for range of x-band freq. for missiles) , which is received by your RWR, and filters the other frequencies and generates a different tone because it detected a signal at different frequency.

RWR will generate a sane tone as if you have got a spike from a air craft in TWS mode when missile has NOT yet lunch yet. But once the seeker of the missile is with in range, and has designated the target, RWR will generate a missile lunch warning( in the case of ARH missile like R-77).

So why should it generate a launch tone at all for a SARH missile? :)

(BTW if I wasn't clear before, you're not telling me anything I don't know).

 

TWS2 should not give any warning, and that is a bug.

 

After all these discussion you finally agreed to one bug... and Hopefully to that EOS system which is ridiculously detects a head-on fighter from 200 km away.

FYI, ED has far more detailed information on those systems than either you or Kopp will ever get their hands on. We know Kopp doesn't write anything useful for simulation. We have been through things like these a lot of times before, and I don't mean to be rude, but you are bringing nothing that is new to the table.

 

Another FYI, it has already been proven that 'common sense' is meaningless when doing realistic simulations of things you don't have data on.

By all means, share it with us, ... send me a link, or a document.... All be happy to learn some thing new.

FYI, if you are talking about http://www.ausairpower.net/ web site, they don't generate information from their own, they put information based on variety of sources... if you look at the bottom of the web page, you will see the list of references.

Another FYI, for the R-77 issue, I referenced the second link not the http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/......

After all these discussion you finally agreed to one bug... and Hopefully to that EOS system which is ridiculously detects a head-on fighter from 200 km away.

No, I already knew about that bug, and so do most testers, but that isn't what you were talking about. You were talking about STT :)

By all means, share it with us, ... send me a link, or a document.... All be happy to learn some thing new.

You're not going to have access to all information, and certainly not to most of the info ED have. You can search the forms and find a lot of info though, personally I don't have the time to do that work for you right now, but it shouldn't be too hard. You can search for things like 'missile performance' etc etc.

FYI, if you are talking about http://www.ausairpower.net/ web site, they don't generate information from their own, they put information based on variety of sources... if you look at the bottom of the web page, you will see the list of references.

I don't see where they're getting reliable information from any of their sources for missiles. Components of missiles etc, sure, missile operation, just the basics, missile performance, out to lunch

R-77 does not have a SARH capability. Its only a Active Homing missile. So even if I do lock a target in STT mode, it should not give missile lunch warning. Please refer to my second link, 1/2 page down, there are information regarding R-77 seeker.

You're talking about stuff which is generally in a very grey area. Do aircraft radars give a warning when ARH or SARH missiles are fired. Stick with what you know, the F-15 in FC uses TWS and STT, TWS gives no lock/launch warning while STT does, the same should apply to the MiG. The problem which has been around since its introduction in FC3 is with TWS2, everything else works as it says on the DCS tin.

 

When missile lunches at your air craft the seeker of the missile emits power in X-band (lets say 3.8- 4.6 Ghz for range of x-band freq. for missiles) , which is received by your RWR, and filters the other frequencies and generates a different tone because it detected a signal at different frequency.

 

If you fire a SARH from 80km away how is the target RWR going to detect anything emitting off the missile at that range? The emission detected by the RWR of frequency shift or change of mode surely comes from the aircrafts radar, the same is most probably happening when a ARH is launched in STT and that is why ED models it this way.

Taken from Carlo Kopp.

Active Radar Guided AAMs

The third option one may choose is the use of semi-active radar midcourse guidance. Like in all semi-active radar systems, the fire control employs a microwave beam to illuminate the target. The missile receives this energy and uses it to guide in within the range of its own radar, which is then used for the terminal phase. Semi-active midcourse guidance offers the advantage of simplicity, as the missile need only use its own radar in a passive mode, without any datalink receivers or inertial reference systems. On the other hand, though, this form of guidance lends itself to deception and jamming, if appropriate measures are not taken.

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Radar-AAMs.html

Stick with what you know, the F-15 in FC uses TWS and STT, TWS gives no lock/launch warning while STT does, the same should apply to the MiG.

I am not questioning the AIM-120 performance with F-15. I already know that TWS gives no warning to the enemy fighter, but R-77 is a bit different, and its NOT same for MIG heres why.....

If you fire a SARH from 80km away how is the target RWR going to detect anything emitting off the missile at that range? The emission detected by the RWR of frequency shift or change of mode surely comes from the aircrafts radar,

OFF COURSE IT DOES, thats not some thing new,

the same is most probably happening when a ARH is launched in STT and that is why ED models it this way.

R-77 is NOT a SARH missile, nor a combination of SAHR and ARH. It has ARH\ DL\ AND IMU.

And BTW, there is no such a thing as "most probably happening when ARH is launched in STT."

Thats a assumption you are making, and it doesn't fall in line as to what ARH is my friend. :)

ARH - Active Radar Homing

DL- Datalink

IMU- Inertial Measurement Unit

Taken from Carlo Kopp.

Active Radar Guided AAMs

The third option one may choose is the use of semi-active radar midcourse guidance. Like in all semi-active radar systems, the fire control employs a microwave beam to illuminate the target. The missile receives this energy and uses it to guide in within the range of its own radar, which is then used for the terminal phase. Semi-active midcourse guidance offers the advantage of simplicity, as the missile need only use its own radar in a passive mode, without any datalink receivers or inertial reference systems. On the other hand, though, this form of guidance lends itself to deception and jamming, if appropriate measures are not taken.

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Radar-AAMs.html

The semi-active radar mid-course guidance is applies to american ARH missiles, and to semi-active missile such as AIM-54 phoenix missile. I already read the whole thing.

Another reason that's not the case for R-77, look where I highlighted the quote you got from carlo Kopps, it even mentioned that by using semi-active radar mid-course, it does not uses datalink receivers or inertial reference system.

Which is NOT the case for R-77, because it DOES uses datalink and IMU for its guidance to the target.

So does AIM-120, AIM-7, R-27E/ER, not to mention a whole bunch of other AAMs and SAMs. :)

Which is NOT the case for R-77, because it DOES uses datalink and IMU for its guidance to the target.

No, I already knew about that bug, and so do most testers, but that isn't what you were talking about. You were talking about STT :)

If you already knew about it, why didn't you guys do anything about it? cuz, it had these problems for months (probably for more than 4-5 months).

BTW, I wasn't just talking about R-77 in STT mode. I raised 2 major issues:

1- EOS system of all Russian fighters in FC3

2- R-77 missile lunch warning in all the radar modes (NOT just STT).

You're not going to have access to all information, and certainly not to most of the info ED have. You can search the forms and find a lot of info though, personally I don't have the time to do that work for you right now, but it shouldn't be too hard. You can search for things like 'missile performance' etc etc.

Why I cant access to the informations ED has regarding R-77 ??? IS it because its too classified?!?!? lol Is there any information at all ?!?!?

You claimed that what I say about R-77 is not true, and my sources are not worthy, but if I want to get it, it not too hard... while you failed to provide a single documentation or source regarding this topic.

I don't see where they're getting reliable information from any of their sources for missiles. Components of missiles etc, sure, missile operation, just the basics, missile performance, out to lunch

Well, what is a reliable sources??? give me a link, or a document.

Not trying to be rude, but the informations you guys have are no where near reliable either, because every time you guys fix a bug, you break dosen more, and we all know that.

Keep in mind, I am not saying that the information you guys have are not good at all, I am saying its not sufficient in every detail, and needs work, research, which is why I posted this topic in first place.