Jump to content

Aim-120 Range


Recommended Posts

We are working on a new flight dynamics of 120. It will be built on new principles and much deeper.

 

 

That is very good to hear, I think. As of now in my opinion, (disagree if you will,) The Aim-120C is getting closer to being modeled right. The 120B is still far too dragy along with all other ED missiles. Now, I fully agree that "brochure ranges," are mainly BS under 99% of all circumstances and more just a selling strategy for the missile manufacturer. There is no way that I would expect an AMRAAM to go 40 or even 30 miles and knock a fighter jet right out of the sky. However, there comes a point where common sense sends up a red flag. I am very glad to see that newcomers are surprised and are challenging ED modeled missiles as well, (they should be!). Now, I am no aerodynamics engineer (I am actually aerospace) but the fact that an Aim-120c, One of America's Deadliest Air to Air missiles, can't successfully intercept a high flying target at 20, 15 OR EVEN 10NM is somewhat alarming. Below, I have provided some tracks from 2.5.6 showing some different scenarios. Two tracks are created under the so called, "Ideal Conditions," scenario where two aircraft are at 30000 ft closing at mach 2. In the first track I am a Heavily loaded F-18, when an Aim-120c is shot at me and as you will see, it misses by a fair amount. In the second track, I am a fully loaded F-16, when an Aim-120B is fired at me. Not only do I not break mach one in the defense but I even put on the brakes to give it a fighting chance, it still misses! :doh: Track number three shows an Aim-120C trying to intercept me at a lower altitude but closer range, which it does not. The final track shows the mighty Sd-10 knocking me right out of the sky. Here, I am a Clean F-15C, and even though I try everything to try to avoid it, it still gets me. Now I am not here to say that Deka and their work is correct, but again, in my opinion, I think they are on the right path. It would indeed certainly help if they actually provided some sources to back up their work. Regardless, this track is mainly meant to show the enormous discontinuity between ED's modeling of missiles and Dekas. I am glad to hear that more work is planning to be done on the missiles and hopefully soon, these scenarios in the first three tracks will not be possible anymore.

Aim-120c Test.trk

Aim-120b Test .trk

Aim-120c Test 2.trk

Sd-10 Test.trk


Edited by DCS FIGHTER PILOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Pretty sure the DLZs you have in the Viper are just placeholders. Not sure about the Hornet, but to be honest I expect the same. DLZs in DCS overall have been borderline worthless since the dawn of ti

Why do you think the AIM-120 is not correct?

 

Due to the fact that I can kinetically defeat it under "Ideal Conditions," from a bit over 10 miles away Fully Loaded down with ordnance!. I would easily believe this type of outcome if it were shot at around 15-20 miles but not at the ranges in the video, we seem like we are just too close to each other for the missile to lose its energy like it did. As was mentioned in another post, at these ranges we might as well be shooting heaters at each other.


Edited by DCS FIGHTER PILOT
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many folks seems to have this 'brochure ranges' in the back of their heads.

 

I can tell just one thing: read/listen interviews with pilots employing BVR missiles during last 30 years and note what was the range they fired missiles.

 

In most cases it was barely more than 10nm. Very often they were supersonic shooting the missile, they had altitude advantage and their target rarely was making any evasive maneuvers. Still they sometimes missed in this ideal conditions.

I wouldn't be surprised if Deka was too optimistic with their missiles what, accidentially, confirmed some folks's very optimistic 'brochure' range expectations and that's the reason many guys so willingly believe Deka's 'interpretation'.

I saw their anti radiation missile - HARM counterpart - achieving some hard to believe speeds and barely decelerating at all after burnout, in shallow climb..

 

(BTW. Air combat in simulations after Desert Storm, maybe Allied Force, is highly hipotetical, there were no major air battles since then.)


Edited by bies
Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for tracks!

Why do you think the AIM-120 is not correct?

Let's not pay attention to the SD-10.

 

Hello Chizh, You must pay attention to the; SD10, 530D etc etc. All missiles mentioned are incorporated into DCS, so must be (benchmarked) simulated accordingly. Otherwise what's the point? No good having a beautifully simulated AIM120B, C and an un-simulated SD10, 530D etc.

My Hangar:

F16C | FA18C | F14A/B | M2000C | AV8B | A10C/ii | KA50 | UH1H | Gazelle | FC3 | CA | Supercarrier

 

My Spec:

Obsidian750D Airflow | Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon | 8700K | 32GB DDR4 Vengeance @3600 | RTX2070 Super | ZXR PCIe | WD Black 1TB SSD | Log X56 | Log G502 | TrackIR | 1 badass mutha

Link to post
Share on other sites
Due to the fact that I can kinetically defeat it under "Ideal Conditions," from a bit over 10 miles away Fully Loaded down with ordnance!. I would easily believe this type of outcome if it were shot at around 15-20 miles but not at the ranges in the video, we seem like we are just too close to each other for the missile to lose its energy like it did. As was mentioned in another post, at these ranges we might as well be shooting heaters at each other.

 

What is your argument that this is wrong? Do you have any facts or evidence that the missile should kill under those conditions?

 

If you want to have a missile that has good kinematics, then wait for the R-27ER/ET update. It should turn into a monster if ED does realistic.

Aim-120 is a small missile that does not carry a lot of energy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Chizh, You must pay attention to the; SD10, 530D etc etc. All missiles mentioned are incorporated into DCS, so must be (benchmarked) simulated accordingly. Otherwise what's the point? No good having a beautifully simulated AIM120B, C and an un-simulated SD10, 530D etc.

 

It is easier in this thread about AIM-120 if we do not discuss about the SD10 etcand other missiles.

 

Fix them missile at the time by reporting what is wrong with them, missile at the time. Not all in one punch.

 

ED is developing new mechanics and system to model ALL missiles, not just one missile. It doesn't help to talk about believed problems in AIM-120 by talking about SD-10 or so.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In most cases it was barely more than 10nm. Very often they were supersonic shooting the missile, they had altitude advantage and their target rarely was making any evasive maneuvers. Still they sometimes missed in this ideal conditions.

 

Based to statics, almost all BVR missiles that has gained a kill, has been launched well in the visual range. And even then if targets has not had even RWR, they didn't maneuver much and lacked even the Chaff and not to menton ECM systems.

 

Why the discussions about the BVR missiles high performance is very challenging when not counted the chaff, maneuvers and especially classified ECM systems.

 

So best we can do is actually just talk about the pure kinetic performance, not even about the targeting system by any other points than what would be the seeker FOV, gimbal limits, degree/second rate etc, technical things.

 

If we go to follow the history of the BVR missiles use, it is not pretty.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why the discussions about the BVR missiles high performance is very challenging when not counted the chaff, maneuvers and especially classified ECM systems.

 

So best we can do is actually just talk about the pure kinetic performance (...)

 

Only flight engineers equiped with specific, often classified, data and knowledge can discuss 'about the BVR missiles high performance'.

 

Opinions of other common folks, including me, without producer's or test energy charts and knowledge to interpret this data precisily and knowing all conditions of the test, is close to worthless - a strange mix of false expectations, wishful thinking and imagination.

 

I admit some guys have something interesting to say but some with posts like

"increase the range by xxx % because i feel it will be just accurate (with 0 mathematic proof)" or

"in conditions X and range Y the missile should hit because i feel so (with zero mathematic proof)"

Yea, for sure:music_whistling:

 

The other thing is ED should have control over all weapons in the sim to unify them under common set of rules and math models. I can't imagine some 3rd party adding some missile with i.e. understated drag to achieve better parameters relatively to other real life counterparts.


Edited by bies
Link to post
Share on other sites
Only flight engineers equiped with specific, often classified, data and knowledge can discuss 'about the BVR missiles high performance'.

 

Opinions of other common folks, including me, without producer's or test energy charts and knowledge to interpret this data precisily and knowing all conditions of the test, is close to worthless - a strange mix of false expectations, wishful thinking and imagination.

 

I admit some guys have something interesting to say but some with posts like

"increase the range by xxx % because i feel it will be just accurate (with 0 mathematic proof)" or

"in conditions X and range Y the missile should hit because i feel so (with zero mathematic proof)"

Yea, for sure:music_whistling:

 

If the 120B,C is modelled as correctly as can be at all altitudes etc, benchmark all other ED and partner A2A missiles accordingly, otherwise you have an arcade game and not a simulation. If you cannot benchmark said missiles, what are they doing in the 'simulation'?


Edited by DAZnBLAST

My Hangar:

F16C | FA18C | F14A/B | M2000C | AV8B | A10C/ii | KA50 | UH1H | Gazelle | FC3 | CA | Supercarrier

 

My Spec:

Obsidian750D Airflow | Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon | 8700K | 32GB DDR4 Vengeance @3600 | RTX2070 Super | ZXR PCIe | WD Black 1TB SSD | Log X56 | Log G502 | TrackIR | 1 badass mutha

Link to post
Share on other sites
What is your argument that this is wrong? Do you have any facts or evidence that the missile should kill under those conditions?

 

Im sure you have all seen this but I will conveniently put it here for you all to see again.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806

 

I mean seriously, even without the rigors of aerodynamics involved, do you honestly believe that a 21st century air to air missile would run out of energy and miss a target when fired from 10 miles away at 30000ft at over mach 1?!?!!?? As I mentioned before, from 15 miles I could see this but 10?! Come on.


Edited by DCS FIGHTER PILOT
Link to post
Share on other sites

have ED rocket configured better than have other, have SD-10 there is no koefetsientov resistance, Phoenix constantly goes on overload maximum, these all missiles need fix, not compare with them missiles from ED. witness how many works engine have aim120, then think on razognanom car if turn off engine and turn on 90 degrees that will happen? in aim120, you need to configure its outputs to overload, so that it does not fly after you like a cat after a mouse)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Chizh, You must pay attention to the; SD10, 530D etc etc. All missiles mentioned are incorporated into DCS, so must be (benchmarked) simulated accordingly. Otherwise what's the point? No good having a beautifully simulated AIM120B, C and an un-simulated SD10, 530D etc.

 

Some developers make weapons themselves according to their own references and as they see fit.


Edited by Chizh

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some developers make weapons themselves according to their own references and as they see fit.
Mmm I'm sure you have discussed this internally. It is a slippery slope and should be taken with care, just saying...

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is ten miles some sort of magic figure for you? Why is ten miles the border for what is believable or not? Do you believe this because of where you have always thought the border between WVR and BVR is?

 

If a radar missile can’t even intercept a target from 10 miles away under ideal conditions then why bother making them? They are not passive at close range and are very expensive. Economically speaking, if this scenario was true in reality, their existence would make little sense. At these ranges, IR missiles like the R-27T, would be just as if not more effective against the target.


Edited by DCS FIGHTER PILOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
If a radar missile can’t even intercept a target from 10 miles away under ideal conditions then why bother making them? They are not passive at close range and are very expensive. Economically speaking, if this scenario was true in reality, their existence would make little sense. At these ranges, IR missiles like the R-27T, would be just as if not more effective against the target.
You are stating too many assumptions that are just plain wrong, even at the current modelling of DCS.

 

Missiles, specifically aim120C do hit over 10mn, they also do at 15 mn or even 20mn. They just need certain things to happen that is for sure.

 

But they are obviously useful tactically even when they do not hit.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a post where it had a link to a very nice post showing graphs and charts and mathematical equations. Very nice but my question is how is a AIM-9L comparable to a AIM-120C? Are they different in size, weight, motor, fins? Asking for a friend.

pilotfly.gif
Link to post
Share on other sites
Due to the fact that I can kinetically defeat it under "Ideal Conditions," from a bit over 10 miles away Fully Loaded down with ordnance!. I would easily believe this type of outcome if it were shot at around 15-20 miles but not at the ranges in the video, we seem like we are just too close to each other for the missile to lose its energy like it did. As was mentioned in another post, at these ranges we might as well be shooting heaters at each other.

Yes you can win. You performed a series of hard evasive maneuvers with up to 6G overloads. At the same time, you were constantly fleeing a missile. It’s perfectly normal that you survive with such maneuvering at low altitude.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im sure you have all seen this but I will conveniently put it here for you all to see again.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806

These are old stuff of 2014-2016.

Since then, a lot has changed in the DCS.

 

I mean seriously, even without the rigors of aerodynamics involved, do you honestly believe that a 21st century air to air missile would run out of energy and miss a target when fired from 10 miles away at 30000ft at over mach 1?!?!!??

What track?

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
What track?

 

That would be track number 2 in the ones I posted showing the Aim-120B loosing it energy and missing under ideal conditions. Not only that but in the defense I deliberately stay under Mach one and even hit the speed brakes at the end. First one shows 120c missing under same conditions at 12 miles.


Edited by DCS FIGHTER PILOT
Link to post
Share on other sites
That would be track number 2 in the ones I posted showing the Aim-120B loosing it energy and missing under ideal conditions. Not only that but in the defense I deliberately stay under Mach one and even hit the speed brakes at the end. First one shows 120c missing under same conditions at 12 miles.

 

It seems you do not really understand what ideal conditions are.

Ideally, the target should fly directly to the fighter and not change course, altitude and speed. It is from this assumption that the maximum ranges for missiles are pointed.

 

You immediately completed the evasion maneuver and went to low altitude, where a high density of air quickly slows down the missile.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine at this range that I would be within “range no escape.” Perhaps this is the confusion you speak of. Regardless, is any of this even going to matter after the update? What can we expect to see in the future? What are your predictions? What will this virtual wind tunnel do that has not already been done?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...