Any updates on Eagle Dynamics giving Heatblur access to Aim-54 guidance changes?

Just want to say thank you all at Heat Blur for keeping us informed on these things. As complex as sims like this are, it's very easy for us to get lost in the variables and start making up all sorts of mystic incantations on what's going on. I'm glad you all are able to take the time to clarify these things.

I think we explained that already couple times, but I will try to do it very briefly again:

 

basically it works like an aim120. it goes active at a certain range, this range atm is set to 15nm (we cannot change that atm for various reasons, let us say it is the best compromise atm). this is what causes the abrupt high G energy bleeding turn into the bandit at the last moment. IRL it would go active about half the way to its target. In STT it also works the same atm, while irl it would actually be guided like a SARH missile in STT or iirc as long as it is not active, too. Another thing that is happening atm that is out of our hands is that if lock is broken before going pitbull, it still guides without setting it to active in the RIO pit. which gives you somewhat of an advantage in MP. Why this is happening I could not say. the guiding through mountains btw is the case with all active or semi active missiles in dcs and has to do something with the INS guidance they all share at the moment. Hope that helps.

Really appreciate the input! :thumbup:

I hope you will be able to sort this out with ED soon.

Another thing that is happening atm that is out of our hands is that if lock is broken before going pitbull, it still guides without setting it to active in the RIO pit. which gives you somewhat of an advantage in MP. Why this is happening I could not say.

But can you say whether HB or ED is investigating this?

Thanks but TBH I have never been sure how the Aim 120 works in DCS.

Just to clarify your comment as I have seen various people saying STT improves PK and others say that you can just turn away etc.

At the moment the missile launches directly towards the target ?

At 15 nm it goes active and then does a hard turn if required due to no mid course guidance and then tries to "hit" the target. Does the seeker head FOV have an effect on this at the time it goes active?

Sorry to ask but in testing I have been unable to see a consistent pattern.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

But can you say whether HB or ED is investigating this?

Read the post you are quoting. He said it is out of HB's hands. It's something ED needs to fix...or at least allow HB to look at the code, which they do not have access to at the moment.

The biggest issues with the Aim 54 apart from the fact that HB cant model it properly due to ED . Is actually with the netcode of the game itself and radar memory issues that are core game engine flaws /missile guidance flaws.

On the Shooter side (the 14 firing 54s) If the AWG-9 looses track of a target the missile will then go on its own and go out of a loft and pretty much go straight for the target. On the receiving end (what the server sees and everyone else ) the missile stays into a loft like its had the radar tracking all the way. This then causes dysync between the person receiving the 54 and the person shooting it , also if the radar reacquires the target the missile will start lofting again and the more times this happens the more dysync accrues.

Furthermore there is a memory exploit that allows you to guide a 54 till pitbull while not even scanning the target anymore , so you can go cold and have a 54 fully track. This also makes it guide through any sort of terrain 100% accurately until pitbull which is a flaw. Ironically this actually reduces the amount of dysync drastically and doing this makes your target have a better chance of notching as its generally fully synced.

These are not Heatblurs fault and there is nothing they can do about it , expect the memory tracking which could be removed until ED fix it.

I think we explained that already couple times, but I will try to do it very briefly again:

 

basically it works like an aim120. it goes active at a certain range, this range atm is set to 15nm (we cannot change that atm for various reasons, let us say it is the best compromise atm). this is what causes the abrupt high G energy bleeding turn into the bandit at the last moment. IRL it would go active about half the way to its target. In STT it also works the same atm, while irl it would actually be guided like a SARH missile in STT or iirc as long as it is not active, too. Another thing that is happening atm that is out of our hands is that if lock is broken before going pitbull, it still guides without setting it to active in the RIO pit. which gives you somewhat of an advantage in MP. Why this is happening I could not say. the guiding through mountains btw is the case with all active or semi active missiles in dcs and has to do something with the INS guidance they all share at the moment. Hope that helps.

In STT it also works the same atm, while irl it would actually be guided like a SARH missile in STT or iirc as long as it is not active, too. A slight addition from me but my understanding is that irl it will get mid course guidance from the AWG 9 in Tws auto during it's TOF hence the scan azimuth and bar limitations.

Point is that this implies that it doesn't matter what you do with the awg9. This is what I was trying to get IRONNIKE to clarify, tho maybe it's an ED question.

All I know about our DCS Aim 120 is that it's a crap simulation. I have never seen the actual DCS Aim 120 modelling explained, if someone has the definitive explanation I would love to hear it.

TBH it's a sim and I can work with whatever I am given, for example if there is no mid course guidance then I want to be at 0 aspect for every shot to maximize my PK. The problem currently is that I have no idea how the missile modelling is working so it's a literally a shot in the dark most of the time.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Thanks but TBH I have never been sure how the Aim 120 works in DCS.

 

Just to clarify your comment as I have seen various people saying STT improves PK and others say that you can just turn away etc.

 

At the moment the missile launches directly towards the target ?

 

At 15 nm it goes active and then does a hard turn if required due to no mid course guidance and then tries to "hit" the target. Does the seeker head FOV have an effect on this at the time it goes active?

 

Sorry to ask but in testing I have been unable to see a consistent pattern.

 

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

correct, Windy. Basically you have an active missile off the rails atm in non STT. but this is a recent bug, this was not like that on release. I did not have time yet to test if when launched STT, and lock was broken, the missile would still guide, but in congruance with this always active bug, it would appear to me it does. The seeker's FOV however does still matter. If the missile itself loses track, then ofc it loses track. which is probably why you get a better PK in STT as the radar still does help with guidance. this seems also to be the case with the 120. Sorry if I cannot give a better answer. EDIT: I wrongly said until we get access to the code, which is technically wrong, guidance is ED side, not our side at all, which means we are neither expecting nor will we most likely get access to the code. What I meant was until we can define its active and semi-active behavior.

If you can test the STT - break lock - guiding or not? and let me know that would be great. I am currently away on vacation and cannot test from here, I will be back home on Friday and will then test myself, too.

small edit: it does not launch straight at the target but lofts ofc. and yes the lack of mid guidance is what then causes it to do the hard turn at the end, because of the loft. It is a compromise atm.

correct, Windy. Basically you have an active missile off the rails atm in non STT. but this is a recent bug, this was not like that on release. I did not have time yet to test if when launched STT, and lock was broken, the missile would still guide, but in congruance with this always active bug, it would appear to me it does. The seeker's FOV however does still matter. If the missile itself loses track, then ofc it loses track. which is probably why you get a better PK in STT as the radar still does help with guidance. this seems also to be the case with the 120. Sorry if I cannot give a better answer until we get access to the seeker and fully see how it is done or code it to as it should be.

 

If you can test the STT - break lock - guiding or not? and let me know that would be great. I am currently away on vacation and cannot test from here, I will be back home on Friday and will then test myself, too.

 

small edit: it does not launch straight at the target but lofts ofc. and yes the lack of mid guidance is what then causes it to do the hard turn at the end, because of the loft. It is a compromise atm.

I can test that no problem as I am grounded at the moment .

Last question if there is guidance from STT is the also guidance from TWS . But I will test that too anyway.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Last question if there is guidance from STT is the also guidance from TWS .

 

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

I'd have to double check, but I think until pitbull, or until you break away, it gets support from the radar in TWS, too. Which not sure how much it matters atm as the missile seems to be pitbull off the rail anyway.

I'd have to double check, but I think until pitbull, or until you break away, it gets support from the radar in TWS, too. Which not sure how much it matters atm as the missile seems to be pitbull off the rail anyway.

In terms of firing in TWS my experience is that it helps a lot if you keep feeding the missile TWS info up until the missile itself is 20-15 nm from the target. If you turn before this the missile seems to go stupid for a while until it reaches pitbull range, and then suddenly it veers toward the target losing a lot of energy in the process.

Also I only ever use STT when the target is within 25 nm as I know the missile will then quickly close to the necessary pitbull range, and I still have time to turn around if a 120 is fired.

I'd have to double check, but I think until pitbull, or until you break away, it gets support from the radar in TWS, too.

That's pretty much a requirement to be able to launch multiple missiles at multiple targets, right (at least IRL)? The radar has to update each missile on where its respective target is so you don't get three missiles chasing one target when they all go pitbull downrange.

Mate the discussion is the current modelling in DCS not the real life missile. ATM it appears to be unclear if there is any guidance post launch.

Hummingbird were your tests on a zero nose aspect. If not are you seeing guidance after the initial pure pursuit launch ?. I am gonna take a look later this afternoon.

If you shoot with any aspect greater than 0 the fact that the missile heads straight for the target will mean that it will have a big turn at pitbull. This effect may be negligible on a 15nm to 20 nm shot and have a massive effect on a 50 nm shot.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Imagine the shitstorm when the Phoenix will be modeled correct and does not hit anything anymore when loosing the target after firing and the WCS never sends the signal for going active *ggg*.

 

(Don't ask me how often I have seen that "fire and forget" behavor online)

The fighter bro's will be mad bro.

M

Hummingbird were your tests on a zero nose aspect. If not are you seeing guidance after the initial pure pursuit launch ?. I am gonna take a look later this afternoon.

 

If you shoot with any aspect greater than 0 the fact that the missile heads straight for the target will mean that it will have a big turn at pitbull. This effect may be negligible on a 15nm to 20 nm shot and have a massive effect on a 50 nm shot.

Yes, mostly zero aspect shots, however the target ofcourse often moves post launch which is what causes the big turn at pitbull if you lose TWS lock in between. Hence the most effective shot is the one which is guided up until pitbull, the rest usually miss for me.

We just tried 40 Aspect shots locked, TWS and shoot and run. Missile was pure pursuit with loft in all cases up until 15 nm where it goes pitbull and tries to kill the target with some collision geometry. It appears to truly be Active off the rail in as much as it does pure pursuit until active and the AWG9 makes no difference as far as I can see at all.

Even slacker it still pure pursuits the target goes active and tries to kill it. PK appeared to be more to do with target manouvering abd chaff than anything the AWG 9 was doing.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

We just tried 40 Aspect shots locked, TWS and shoot and run. Missile was pure pursuit with loft in all cases up until 15 nm where it goes pitbull and tries to kill the target with some collision geometry. It appears to truly be Active off the rail in as much as it does pure pursuit until active and the AWG9 makes no difference as far as I can see at all.

 

Even slacker it still pure pursuits the target goes active and tries to kill it. PK appeared to be more to do with target manouvering abd chaff than anything the AWG 9 was doing.

 

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Thanks a ton, buddy! This confirms my suspicions. The AWG-9 "might" still help in guidance if the target is out of the seeker's FOV, but with this behavior it is almost impossible to tell. the chaff theory could be right, but also hard to tell.

This is all good information we can take on board guys, thanks a lot!

That's indeed outstanding information here that clarifies a lot about the current state of the Phoenix in DCS. Untill now I never really knew whtat is going on when I launch the missile, when I loose lock, when I use TWS, when I use STT, and so on, which can pretty frustrating. Now it's a bit clearer what is actually happening. :thumbup:

I really hope ED will do something about it rather sooner than later, so HB can code the missile as it works IRL!

So if I'm understanding the conversation correctly, does this mean the missile actually is active off the rails and the target gets a RWR launch warning from shots in TWS and STT? That's a big bummer. ED needs to fix this ASAP or stop calling it a sim.

So if I'm understanding the conversation correctly, does this mean the missile actually is active off the rails and the target gets a RWR launch warning from shots in TWS and STT? That's a big bummer. ED needs to fix this ASAP or stop calling it a sim.

It is active off the rails, but RWR warning will only be audible/visible for your opponent in either STT or when the missile goes pitbull. So if anything atm it is a bit of an advantage.

Just a slight clarification the missile is not really active off the rail ( using its own seeker, truly pitbull ). It is pure pursuit from launch ( guiding as if you were helping it with the AWG9 tho in pp rather than collision) this is an ED mechanic.

At approx 15 nm it goes active and changes steering to collision steering ( that's where it makes the big energy burning turn sometimes)

At the moment there is no guidance requirement and the PK is independent of AWG guidance.

The target will get alerted by the missile going truly active at approximately 15 nm to go. It's not really active of the rail per se, it uses an ED mechanism described above to give us a Phoenix within their current missile programming.

Hopefully Heatblur will be allowed to reprogram the missile in the future. I do believe it will make the missile harder to use, as you will have to support it properly till active, which happens way later than 15nm. That also means that if the missile is shot from TWS the target will get alerted later tho, so not all bad

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Out of 2000+ tests so far, the AWG-9 is in no case the reason why an AIM-54 has been defeated. The vast majority is due to the seeker then, depending on the conditions, the energy of the missile becomes a factor.

For instance, this is the result of 720 AIM-54A Mk60 and AIM-54C Mk47 fired at 1,000ft and 15nm, 20nm, 25nm.

This is from a total of 960 tests, 480 for each missile. This time I took altitude into consideration: 25nm and 1000ft, 7000ft, 15000ft, 25000ft.

I'm releasing the article about the latter today (as soon I find the will to check grammar and syntax). Each article has tables inside with all the numbers and tacview screenshots to clarify how the missiles are defeated. For instance, this is very typical:

I'm also preparing an istogram with the cumulative results of what I found so far (that's the only type of charts that works with so few results - 1440.

At what range is the real missile supposed to go pitbull?

Wow! Please link the article here :)

Hehe Karon RIO, best RIO.