Loft against jamming targets

[falcon_120]

Regarding this:

 

-AIM-120 missile. Disabled loft for AIM-120s when it is launched against jamming targets.

 

 

I have some questions:

-Does it only applies before burnthrough range right? I mean, after burnthrough I don't any reason why it should not loft, once the missile has range information.

 

-Does this aplly to other missiles, specifically the Aim54 and Sd10? I guess it should be like that, now that all weapons behavior are under ED roof, otherwise it would be strange.

 

-In the case of the F18, the jammer simulated its not a noise jammer, but only tries to break lock once obtained. How is DCS simulating that? I mean, as far as I see a f18 vs f18 both jamming should have no impact impeding a amraam loft right? I don't know how it's simulated now but this point came to mind.

 

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

 

 

[BIGNEWY]

Hi

 

it means that if the aircraft is being jammed, the radar has no range information to support a lofted shot. As such, the missiles flies a direct heading along the azimuth.

[falcon_120]

Thx Bignewy for the answer,but I know what it means, and it does not actually answers any of my questions...

I'm asking specifically about jamming targets after burnthrough range, when you already have range information.

Also if it's aplies to aim120 only, which seems random if it's the case.

Regards,

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Northstar98]

Wouldn't lofting after motor burn-out be a bad idea anyway? Because it would probably sap away more energy from the missile, than what would be gained by lofting.

[nighthawk2174]

In theory though couldn't you get a rudimentary loft from LOS rate?  Say keep the target x deg below you and if LOS rate passes a certain point lower that angle until your using raw PN till burnthrough?  Stuff like the javelin iirc does something like this.

Edited July 21, 2021 by nighthawk2174

[falcon_120]

8 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Wouldn't lofting after motor burn-out be a bad idea anyway? Because it would probably sap away more energy from the missile, than what would be gained by lofting.

That indeed would be a bad idea.

 

I rather meant, when you launch a missile at closer ranges, but no so close that lofting does not make sense. Think for example of an F15 able to burnthrough a bandit at 35/40ish nautical miles. At that distance lofting is very beneficial to arrive to the target with a good end game.

 

[M1Combat]

I suspect Newy meant that once you "burn through" it likely acts like it was never being jammed.  I suggest some science to prove...

 

Regarding Q2...  I'd think since it only says Aim120 in the patch notes that it's probably only for the Aim120.

 

Regarding Q3...  I don't know.  I do know that jamming and EW in general is somewhat rudimentary in DCS (and all other titles...) relative to real equipment and capability so...  Just go test stuff and see how it works and then you'll have the best answer possible.

[QuiGon]

On 7/21/2021 at 9:54 PM, falcon_120 said:

Regarding this:

 

-AIM-120 missile. Disabled loft for AIM-120s when it is launched against jamming targets.

 

 

I have some questions:

-Does it only applies before burnthrough range right? I mean, after burnthrough I don't any reason why it should not loft, once the missile has range information.

 

-Does this aplly to other missiles, specifically the Aim54 and Sd10? I guess it should be like that, now that all weapons behavior are under ED roof, otherwise it would be strange.

 

-In the case of the F18, the jammer simulated its not a noise jammer, but only tries to break lock once obtained. How is DCS simulating that? I mean, as far as I see a f18 vs f18 both jamming should have no impact impeding a amraam loft right? I don't know how it's simulated now but this point came to mind.

 

Great questions! I really hope they will recieve some answers!

 

Also: Does this mean aircraft that don't have jamming effects implemented (yet) don't suffer from this? So for example, the F-16 is so far immune against jamming, so I assume it can still loft AMRAAMs against jamming targets?

[SCPanda]

2 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Also: Does this mean aircraft that don't have jamming effects implemented (yet) don't suffer from this? So for example, the F-16 is so far immune against jamming, so I assume it can still loft AMRAAMs against jamming targets?

Thx for asking. I'm curious too. It would be kind of painful if jets like F-16 do suffer from this, since I cannot tell if I am being jammed or not. 

[Harker]

 
Great questions! I really hope they will recieve some answers!
 
Also: Does this mean aircraft that don't have jamming effects implemented (yet) don't suffer from this? So for example, the F-16 is so far immune against jamming, so I assume it can still loft AMRAAMs against jamming targets?

Since the radar is responsible for providing range information to the missile, assuming that the whole launching process logic is simulated even somewhat accurately in DCS, the missile should loft, since it has range data.

Which means that the only aircraft affected by this new mechanic are the Horner and the Eagle.

If the missile doesn't loft when the radar can resolve the range, then it means that the whole process of the radar giving initial target parameters to the missile is not simulated correctly (unless we're talking about shots where it wouldn't loft anyway, of course).

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

On 7/23/2021 at 4:21 PM, Harker said:

 

 

Since the radar is responsible for providing range information to the missile, assuming that the whole launching process logic is simulated even somewhat accurately in DCS, the missile should loft, since it has range data.

Which means that the only aircraft affected by this new mechanic are the Horner and the Eagle.

If the missile doesn't loft when the radar can resolve the range, then it means that the whole process of the radar giving initial target parameters to the missile is not simulated correctly (unless we're talking about shots where it wouldn't loft anyway, of course).

 

Cough cough hoj cough cough

[Harker]

Cough cough hoj cough cough

What about HOJ? HOJ is there as a fallback, when you cannot resolve range and the missile just does a beeline for the jammer. It's purely based on LOS and maybe angular rates. And if you do have resolved range (and velocity), then you don't fire a HOJ shot, you fire a normal one.

I'm saying that if the radar - missile data transfer is simulated correctly, then if the radar can resolve the range and velocity and thus display it to the pilot, it can also provide the same data to the missile.

If, in DCS, you are seeing target range and velocity on your radar screen, but then your AMRAAM behaves like it's a HOJ shot, then the radar - missile data transfer process is not simulated in DCS and your AMRAAM is going HOJ for artificial reasons.

It's easy enough to test, just hop in an F-16, target a contact with the option "ECM: TURN ON WHEN LOCKED" in TWS, look at the firing solution and missile trajectory (fire from far away to ensure lofting) and then repeat the test, but fire from STT this time. In the F-16, your radar will display range and velocity information in both tests and thus the missile trajectory should be the same, in both tests, everything else being equal. NB: The target will turn on their jammer when the AMRAAM goes pitbull, in the TWS, but that's not a problem, as you can observe the loft trajectory way before that happens.

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

20 minutes ago, Harker said:

What about HOJ? HOJ is there as a fallback, when you cannot resolve range and the missile just does a beeline for the jammer. It's purely based on LOS and maybe angular rates. And if you do have resolved range (and velocity), then you don't fire a HOJ shot, you fire a normal one.

I'm saying that if the radar - missile data transfer is simulated correctly, then if the radar can resolve the range and velocity and thus display it to the pilot, it can also provide the same data to the missile.

If, in DCS, you are seeing target range and velocity on your radar screen, but then your AMRAAM behaves like it's a HOJ shot, then the radar - missile data transfer process is not simulated in DCS and your AMRAAM is going HOJ for artificial reasons.

It's easy enough to test, just hop in an F-16, target a contact with the option "ECM: TURN ON WHEN LOCKED" in TWS, look at the firing solution and missile trajectory (fire from far away to ensure lofting) and then repeat the test, but fire from STT this time. In the F-16, your radar will display range and velocity information in both tests and thus the missile trajectory should be the same, in both tests, everything else being equal. NB: The target will turn on their jammer when the AMRAAM goes pitbull, in the TWS, but that's not a problem, as you can observe the loft trajectory way before that happens.

The whole point of hoj is to get the ranging by locking on the waves emited by the jammer.

[Harker]

The whole point of hoj is to get the ranging by locking on the waves emited by the jammer.

It's not. HOJ shots home on the emitter source and they're mostly applicable to noise jammers. They work based on angle and angle rate, but range is unknown. The guidance scheme is probably not unlike an IR missile that's fired without initial radar data. There is no range involved. If you have velocity and range, you don't need to do a HOJ shot to begin with.

Plus, if the much larger, powerful and sophisticated radar of a fighter cannot resolve the range with its ECCM techniques, the small radar of the missile (assuming same tech level) will not do so either, at least not in time to alter the trajectory in any major significant way. This becomes even clearer if we consider the fact that we're talking about optimal lofting trajectory, which is a maneuver dependent on the target's range and velocity and is initiated immediately after launch.

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

-_-

This post was moved to chit chat

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, IkarusC42B Pilot said:

-_-

This post was moved to chit chat

 

Omg, I would love to know the reason for that?! 

Edited September 17, 2021 by QuiGon