Jump to content

AIM-54 is anti-bomber only missile?


DD_Fenrir

Recommended Posts

Eric "TUNA" Martins, ex-Tomcat RIO and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron pilot with VX-4 and VX-9 says different:

 

 

Here's hoping this puts those cross-eyed & ranting members of the anti-phoenix brigade in their place...


Edited by DD_Fenrir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Eric "TUNA" Martins, ex-Tomcat RIO and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron pilot with VX-4 and VX-9 says different:

 

 

Here's hoping this puts those cross-eyed & ranting members of the anti-phoenix brigade in their place...

 

The simple facts from my point of view are that the only place I've seen claiming the AIM-54 wouldn't be good against fighters are rumours on the internet and keyboard warriors having read that.

 

All information we have points towards it being perfectly fine against both bigger bombers and smaller maneuvering targets.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got a time stamp for that? Its 2hrs long.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

While I appreciate that this is presented as evidence to the contrary....did we need to go around this particular barrel again?

 

No going round again required; given the purpose of the VX4/9 squadrons anybody who listens to that and still has a contrary argument... ? Well, 'nuff said.

 

1 minute ago, Harlikwin said:

You got a time stamp for that? Its 2hrs long.

 

Should be in the right place, but 1:33:22 is the spot it should start....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

While I appreciate that this is presented as evidence to the contrary....did we need to go around this particular barrel again?

 

From our point of view this is discussion is over until we're presented evidence to the contrary. But feel free to discuss it if you'd like to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DD_Fenrir said:

No going round again required; given the purpose of the VX4/9 squadrons anybody who listens to that and still has a contrary argument... ? Well, 'nuff said

 

That runs the risk of the echo chamber effect unfortunately, to put my foot down in the right camp... I do think the Phoenix can be effective against fighter sized targets.

 

That said, if you listen to that podcast while they DO say that it direct hit an F4 target drone without a warhead (evidence for) I think the naysayers will focus instead on the later segment about how "against aggressors that knew all about the radar and the Phoenix you'd have a harder time....and be better using a Sparrow" [sic].

 

Now I can hear that and still think, yes any missile is effective if the target is either asleep at long range, or is inside the no escape zone, which is bigger for a AIM-54... its all about selectively choosing the parts to quote and you can flip this thing around. Hence neither side changes their mind.

 

Reality is the missile performance is the least of your worries and holding a TWS or even PD STT lock for the kind of time in flight that a phoenix has will drive most hits / misses, not the size of the target or the kinematic performance of the weapon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

 

That runs the risk of the echo chamber effect unfortunately, to put my foot down in the right camp... I do think the Phoenix can be effective against fighter sized targets.

 

That said, if you listen to that podcast while they DO say that it direct hit an F4 target drone without a warhead (evidence for) I think the naysayers will focus instead on the later segment about how "against aggressors that knew all about the radar and the Phoenix you'd have a harder time....and be better using a Sparrow" [sic].

 

Now I can hear that and still think, yes any missile is effective if the target is either asleep at long range, or is inside the no escape zone, which is bigger for a AIM-54... its all about selectively choosing the parts to quote and you can flip this thing around. Hence neither side changes their mind.

 

Reality is the missile performance is the least of your worries and holding a TWS or even PD STT lock for the kind of time in flight that a phoenix has will drive most hits / misses, not the size of the target or the kinematic performance of the weapon.

 

Yes, this is what I've been saying before. The issue was not the missile itself but rather the AWG-9 and that's were those rumours are coming from. And to be frank I feel like we've done at least some justice to that with our TWS implementation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

Reality is the missile performance is the least of your worries and holding a TWS or even PD STT lock for the kind of time in flight that a phoenix has will drive most hits / misses, not the size of the target or the kinematic performance of the weapon.

 

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

 

However, there was a contingent round these here parts who seemed to think that simply the very act of them being in a fighter aircraft should cause the Phoenix to miss them, and were quite incensed that it refused to adhere to this unassailable logic; it is to them and any other neophyte to DCS, the Tomcat or any aircraft obliged to face it in virtual combat that this thread is addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

 

Yes, this is what I've been saying before. The issue was not the missile itself but rather the AWG-9 and that's were those rumours are coming from. And to be frank I feel like we've done at least some justice to that with our TWS implementation.

 

Absolutely, to give you and the team credit I think the entire radar implementation of the F-14s AWG-9 is the best in class for DCS, warts and all.

 

If other modules didnt have magic multi STT instead of a real TWS implementation then we might not be where we are today, but thats beside my point of congratulating you all once again.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually made this post in another thread, but people that discredit the Iran/Iraq war claims just do not know how to math (or do not bother with it as it would disagree with their preconceptions of the Phoenix):

 

274 AIM-54s were delivered before the 1979 revolution. Assuming all were shot (which is wrong seeing as they still have them today) for a total of ~80 kills, one can estimate a lower limit to the Pk of  ~30%. Supposedly there were 50 AIM-54s "operational" in 1987, but from what I can find that does not includes missiles that were not fired, but were not in combat conditions due to lack of supplies etc. If we assume they fired 174 rounds, had 50 operational left, and 50 non-operational left, the Pk goes up to ~45%. Obviously one can play this game and get even higher Pks, but let's take 45% as the highest sensible number.

 

From what I can find on Google, the AIM-7 Pk in 1982 in BVR (for a very small sample size of 5 shots and 1 kill) was ~20%. I can't find good numbers for Desert Storm but I have seen claims that it was similar to Bekaa Valley - let's assume that instead, it went up to 30%. Also from what I can tell from Wikipedia, the AMRAAM all in all has a Pk of 63%. The fighters the Sparrow, Phoenix and AMRAAM were fired against also do not differ significantly in their capability (ie, they were all cheapy export models with mediocre ECM gear, save perhaps the Iraqi Mirage F1-EQs).

 

Let's be pessimistic and assume all these estimates are off by a factor of about 15% each. That is still enough to conclude that at worst, the -A model Phoenix was as effective as late model Sparrows -or the Skyflash carried by the F3- in terms of Pk (plus bringing a bunch of tactical advantages, obviously). Likely it was considerably better, but still not as good as the AMRAAM. Financial reasons aside, I think that qualifies it as an effective anti-fighter weapon for its time.


Edited by TLTeo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

274 AIM-54s were delivered before the 1979 revolution. Assuming all were shot (which is wrong seeing as they still have them today) for a total of ~80 kills, one can estimate a lower limit to the Pk of  ~30%. Supposedly there were 50 AIM-54s "operational" in 1987, but from what I can find that does not includes missiles that were not fired, but were not in combat conditions due to lack of supplies etc. If we assume they fired 174 rounds, had 50 operational left, and 50 non-operational left, the Pk goes up to ~45%. Obviously one can play this game and get even higher Pks, but let's take 45% as the highest sensible number.

 

 

The trouble is we're still in our little echo chamber - nobody has replied so far to the contrary except me as a poor man devil advocate. To handle this particular case, the numbers are fairly convincing. But the naysayers will be quick to point out that they were making hay while the going was good, most of their targets didn't have RHAW gear that could let them know the F-14 had fired on them in a TWS mode so the first they knew of a Phoenix on the way was when their buddies exploded, thats a very permissive target on the level of a target drone.

 

As they say in all these discussions, due to the extended flight time of the missile and the limitations of the AWG-9, someone thats awake will spoil your TWS shot long before it goes active, or they'll bleed the thing dry unless you waited till you were very close.

 

Its just never as black and white as these kind of discussions and assumptions make it.

 

I can throw in another 100% correct statistic that USN F-14s shot 3 phoenix in anger and none hit anything. All of it depends heavily on how you skew your stats and what your initial assumption / position was.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

But the naysayers will be quick to point out that they were making hay while the going was good, most of their targets didn't have RHAW gear that could let them know the F-14 had fired on them in a TWS mode so the first they knew of a Phoenix on the way was when their buddies exploded, thats a very permissive target on the level of a target drone.

I did address that though - the targets has the same ECM capability regardless of whether they were on the receiving end of Sparrows, Phoenixes or AMRAAMs.

 

7 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

As they say in all these discussions, due to the extended flight time of the missile and the limitations of the AWG-9, someone thats awake will spoil your TWS shot long before it goes active, or they'll bleed the thing dry unless you waited till you were very close.

Yeah, and that's why STT shots should be your go-to against maneuvering targets. Except in DCS, the only radar that's limited like that is the Tomcat, while everybody else gets away with silly shots and therefore the community builds up ridiculous expectations.

 

7 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

I can throw in another 100% correct statistic that USN F-14s shot 3 phoenix in anger and none hit anything. All of it depends heavily on how you skew your stats and what your initial assumption / position was.

Sure, but it's not about whether a statistic is correct or not, it's about interpreting its meaning. Two out of three shots went off because the ground crew didn't arm the missiles properly, and should therefore be discounted. You are left with one valid shot, and one missile missing is entirely consistent with any sub-100% Pk (ie, with any 20th or 21st century missile just...existing). That's what you get for taking statistics out of context.

In that sense, the Iranian stats are a much better sample to look at despite their large uncertainty. My point is, despite that uncertainty, you can still draw a strong conclusion about the Phoenix's performance from those numbers.

 

7 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

The trouble is we're still in our little echo chamber - nobody has replied so far to the contrary except me as a poor man devil advocate.

I agree unfortunately, that's the Internet for you.


Edited by TLTeo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

 

That runs the risk of the echo chamber effect unfortunately, to put my foot down in the right camp... I do think the Phoenix can be effective against fighter sized targets.

 

That said, if you listen to that podcast while they DO say that it direct hit an F4 target drone without a warhead (evidence for) I think the naysayers will focus instead on the later segment about how "against aggressors that knew all about the radar and the Phoenix you'd have a harder time....and be better using a Sparrow" [sic].

 

Now I can hear that and still think, yes any missile is effective if the target is either asleep at long range, or is inside the no escape zone, which is bigger for a AIM-54... its all about selectively choosing the parts to quote and you can flip this thing around. Hence neither side changes their mind.

 

Reality is the missile performance is the least of your worries and holding a TWS or even PD STT lock for the kind of time in flight that a phoenix has will drive most hits / misses, not the size of the target or the kinematic performance of the weapon.

 

Yeah the interesting bit is where he's kinda like, meeeeh against someone who knows what they are doing. And To be fair it sounds 50% radar there and 50% missile, he talks about bleeding it kinematically etc. IDK, overall I miss enough with them online and also hit with them that I feel they are in an ok place. That being said I get way more kills with Aim-7s and Aim-9 against fighter targets in PVP. 

 

I would be interesting to see the actual data from Iran on the real world employment. But then again that would have its own biases such lack of RHAW gear, or not knowing how to fight the missile. It sounds like Iraq pretty quickly figured out how to deal with it after the initial shock wore off. As did the "agressor" squadrons. Not to mention the Tornado guy who was quite unworried about it in that interview.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TLTeo said:

I actually made this post in another thread, but people that discredit the Iran/Iraq war claims just do not know how to math (or do not bother with it as it would disagree with their preconceptions of the Phoenix):

 

274 AIM-54s were delivered before the 1979 revolution. Assuming all were shot (which is wrong seeing as they still have them today) for a total of ~80 kills, one can estimate a lower limit to the Pk of  ~30%. Supposedly there were 50 AIM-54s "operational" in 1987, but from what I can find that does not includes missiles that were not fired, but were not in combat conditions due to lack of supplies etc. If we assume they fired 174 rounds, had 50 operational left, and 50 non-operational left, the Pk goes up to ~45%. Obviously one can play this game and get even higher Pks, but let's take 45% as the highest sensible number.

 

From what I can find on Google, the AIM-7 Pk in 1982 in BVR (for a very small sample size of 5 shots and 1 kill) was ~20%. I can't find good numbers for Desert Storm but I have seen claims that it was similar to Bekaa Valley - let's assume that instead, it went up to 30%. Also from what I can tell from Wikipedia, the AMRAAM all in all has a Pk of 63%. The fighters the Sparrow, Phoenix and AMRAAM were fired against also do not differ significantly in their capability (ie, they were all cheapy export models with mediocre ECM gear, save perhaps the Iraqi Mirage F1-EQs).

 

Let's be pessimistic and assume all these estimates are off by a factor of about 15% each. That is still enough to conclude that at worst, the -A model Phoenix was as effective as late model Sparrows -or the Skyflash carried by the F3- in terms of Pk (plus bringing a bunch of tactical advantages, obviously). Likely it was considerably better, but still not as good as the AMRAAM. Financial reasons aside, I think that qualifies it as an effective anti-fighter weapon for its time.

 

 

The gulf war Aim-7M pk was about 50ish percent from what I recall reading in the past. Actual hits were higher maybe like 60s % wise IIRC. But they didn't kill the target each time. 

 


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

The gulf war Aim-7M pk was about 50ish percent from what I recall reading in the past. 

Do you have a source? I definitely remember it being lower. There were also a bunch of duds etc. It's also the best comparison since it was fired at literally the same aircraft in the same air force as the Iranian Phoenix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

 

The gulf war Aim-7M pk was about 50ish percent from what I recall reading in the past. 

TBF to that as well we need to also keep in mind in some cases multiple missiles were fired (even though the first hit) causing PK to go down I think this happened a few times if my memory is correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

Do you have a source? I definitely remember it being lower. There were also a bunch of duds etc. It's also the best comparison since it was fired at literally the same aircraft in the same air force as the Iranian Phoenix.

The 30% number comes from all AIM-7s expended vs number of kills. The 50% number comes from AIM-7s fired versus number of kills. There isn't a great breakdown of what the criteria between the two scenarios is. 

EDIT: Source for the 50% statistic
https://web.archive.org/web/20130720010705/http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006psa_winter_roundtable/watts.pdf#


Edited by near_blind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

...
But then again that would have its own biases such lack of RHAW gear
...

 

 

Apparently, some of the French supplied Iraqi Mirage F-1s had fairly sophisticated jamming gear, so it probably depends on what the targets were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TLTeo said:

Do you have a source? I definitely remember it being lower. There were also a bunch of duds etc. It's also the best comparison since it was fired at literally the same aircraft in the same air force as the Iranian Phoenix.

 

I'd have to go dig around and look, It was a big report on the airwar IIRC, with some details about various shots. As for "same aircraft", maybe at the very end of the war, but certainly the composition of the Iraqi airforce changed considerably over the course of it along with their capabilities.

 

I for one firmly believe there is a CIA report on how effective the phoenix in Iranian hands is floating around out there, but no luck finding it. Like that had to have been information that they would have desperately wanted.

  • Like 1

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. That doesn't sound too crazy because the numbers I found were from one of those dumb "I hate BVR and we all should be dogfighiting like it's ww2 and here is why" documents - which is why I bumped the Pk from the 20% they claimed in there, to 30%. Even if it were 50% though, I think my point would stand - the -A model Phoenix had a comparable Pk to the Sparrow, and because of the range and extra guidance modes it brought tactical advantages. Hence, good enough anti-fighter weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The overall Pk for Sparrow in 91 was ~.34 without accounting for anything.


There exists non-public analysis that breaks it down further by effects of storage on missile quality, details on how multiple hits against the same aircraft are not counted etc.

The AMRAAM so far has had ~.59 or maybe a bit more, again it'll be higher if certain things are accounted for, such as multiple shots at the same aircraft and poor parameter shots.

 

Interestingly, the Brits found out that the 120 has the same Pk as Sparrow if you don't buy the M-link 🙂


Edited by GGTharos
  • Like 1

[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...