4.37 killed the AMRAAM
-
@WPNS24 - some of the “improvements” I’ve read forum talk about in 4.36 were also a step backwards. The 4.35 model was closer to RL, and I’ve been thinking of ways to try and transplant that model into 4.37…knowing full well that I will kill MP, but I’ll just have to live with that. I guess.
Getting back to some history behind the AIM-120, the F-14A/AWG-9 demonstrated Phoenix shots against six targets in one pass during it’s Development - resulting in six kills…that can NOT be done using STT - Single Target Track. The AIM-120 is essentially a follow-on to Phoenix…so…
-
@WPNS24 See this thread I think people got their wires crossed between STT and RWS maybe for a minute and forgot to address the TWS.
@Stevie AWG-9 and APG-71 were different beasts than the F-16’s puny APG-68 and even then I believe I’ve heard a few F-14 RIOs that said that TWS was pretty amazing, but only on the APG-71, not as effective except for bombers on the AWG-9.
-
@Snake122 - this should only be partially true…and dependent on how you use your radar. Larger scan volumes with wider azimuth sets will/can result in less accuracy…personally, I prefer to keep all radar scans to 2-bar, and generally decrease number of bars with increases in azimuth.
-
@Stevie see my edit above re: F-14. Yes scan volumes and and such are important, but there is also the processing power to develop and maintain the tracks, which was my impression why the AWG-9’s TWS was not the main bread and butter mode like it was for the F-14D.
Check out that thread, you did participate in it some, but especially @OPPOTATO’s reply I found interesting.
-
@Snake122 - this sounds lilke things I’ve heard as well. The AWG-9 was a completely analog radar, and the Phoenix was an analog missile. The AIM-120 is digital, and this is why it didn’t get integrated onto the F-14 (which was part of the original plan).
I think the APG-71 was/is a quantum leap over the AWG-9, but it came along far too late to meet the deployment timeline for the AIM-120 to allow a full development of the system. And thus the Tom ended up in the cat-box…
Yes - the APG-68 has a slightly smaller (and oddly shaped) dish than an APG-65, I think…but from what I’ve read around, I think it puts more power out. I think some of the way the Viper works around this is with their SAM modes…and using RWS certainly makes far more sense than using STT - which frankly, is a very antiquated radar mode…unless you are shooting AIM-7…which is a very antiquated missile.
-
@Snake122 - I think the real reason was that the Tomcat never found itself in a combat situation where it needed to engage multiple targets…and yes, you are onto something about processing power, which is again - an analog limitation in this case.
-
Here’s another flight and I took an AI wingman along with me. The AN-24 is ON APPROACH TO LAND and 2 slammers miss it. Then as you can see, 8 million 27 and 30’s descend upon us and I was able to get another. As you can see in my egress, I’m full gate and the SU-27 easily reached Mach 1.60??? How much fuel can they hold? All of these slammer shots were in TWS mode. Just not a 1 off scenario, it’s a serious concern. These type of engagements even happen with Mig-19/21’s Their evasion skills and the fact the slammer sucks right now is not a fun combo
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FPoW2ctAqt4anHAkhBXb2viP1jCmrqHq/view?usp=share_link
-
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AYD7jqA5zxu23wOHxhJeGz-0rlqjY_yT/view?usp=share_link
ANOTHER Aim-120 that can’t hit a fat lazy AN-24. And then of course the SU-27’s start doing some acrobatic shit… I might as well go guns on every bogey at this rate. Is anyone going to tell me this is normal? I don’t think so
-
@WPNS24 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AYD7jqA5zxu23wOHxhJeGz-0rlqjY_yT/view?usp=share_link
ANOTHER Aim-120 that can’t hit a fat lazy AN-24. And then of course the SU-27’s start doing some acrobatic shit… I might as well go guns on every bogey at this rate. Is anyone going to tell me this is normal? I don’t think so
Hey partner, lower the intensity a bit, you stayed there stuck with the amram thing. You have been answered by the BMS developers themselves and many of them are quite busy and took the time to explain so take it as a compliment. Now turn the page, refresh, fly and let fly.
-
@VIPER-0 I am very grateful for the entire BMS family but they wanted some ACMI files to review and I’m putting fresh info out there for all to see. Not demanding they drop everything and fix it. We have a few of the developers in the Wing I fly with so it’s not like I’m rambling into the vastness of the internet
-
@Stevie Just to be clear, the manual says else. So from that point of wiev STT is the best choice for an 1v1 engagement. But it’s not always clear that we speak “real life” or “BMS code” mechanism. Maybe @Mav-jp could say a few words about the BMS side.
Additionally I didn’t find info about TTS mode, but I think it means the mode if you bug a target in RWS. -
Guys
Could you just stop spreading inaccurate information
Aim120B flight model has been UNCHANGED for years (2015) in term of guidance and unchanged since 4.32 in term of flight model (read performance)
Aim120C flight model was a copy of the AIM120B and has been beefed up in 4.35
STT is the best choice for supporting aim120
And after 4 hours of intense testing i dont see any radical problem with AIM120.
We can improve the lead guidance thought that is too much in some cases but it won’t changed anything radically
-
@Stevie said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@WPNS24 - some of the “improvements” I’ve read forum talk about in 4.36 were also a step backwards. The 4.35 model was closer to RL, and I’ve been thinking of ways to try and transplant that model into 4.37…knowing full well that I will kill MP, but I’ll just have to live with that. I guess.
Getting back to some history behind the AIM-120, the F-14A/AWG-9 demonstrated Phoenix shots against six targets in one pass during it’s Development - resulting in six kills…that can NOT be done using STT - Single Target Track. The AIM-120 is essentially a follow-on to Phoenix…so…
The AIM-54 never achieved six kills during a test.
-
@WPNS24 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AYD7jqA5zxu23wOHxhJeGz-0rlqjY_yT/view?usp=share_link
ANOTHER Aim-120 that can’t hit a fat lazy AN-24. And then of course the SU-27’s start doing some acrobatic shit… I might as well go guns on every bogey at this rate. Is anyone going to tell me this is normal? I don’t think so
What i see in all your ACMIs is always the same thing
-
there might be a glitch in terminal guidance lead parameters and gains , as i was saying above we will look at it , but this has been unchanged since 2015 so yes we can improve, but no 4.37 didnt kill the AIM120 !!!
-
are you by chance flying MP here ? because the “shit” your are seeing in AI trajectories looks more like a MP game to me than anything else
And now we heard you, we will spend time on it so calm down
-
-
@mirv said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@molnibalage said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@MaxWaldorf said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
Discussed many times…
STT is just not a reliable mode and it was nerfed on purpose…
STT provides the higher track refresh rate but only against a single target in RL.
I do not get this statement.I think it was a goof….maybe he read STT but thought TWS….
Indeed I meant TWS…
-
@Mav-jp yes this is a campaign and yes these very similar results happened in a Wing TE that our dev/teammate put together. The conclusion has been both have seemed that the AMRAAM is not “God-like” maybe putting it where it’s supposed to be. I will say that I don’t get shot down every time an AI shoots a missile so I understand logic. I’m just telling you from the thousands upon thousands of hours I have logged from Falcon 3.0 to 4.0 to Allied force… you get the picture.
This is a forum and if someone has questions or concerns I don’t think people should be uncomfortable by voicing opinions
-
@WPNS24 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp yes this is a campaign and yes these very similar results happened in a Wing TE that our dev/teammate put together. The conclusion has been both have seemed that the AMRAAM is not “God-like” maybe putting it where it’s supposed to be. I will say that I don’t get shot down every time an AI shoots a missile so I understand logic. I’m just telling you from the thousands upon thousands of hours I have logged from Falcon 3.0 to 4.0 to Allied force… you get the picture.
This is a forum and if someone has questions or concerns I don’t think people should be uncomfortable by voicing opinions
Well I logged thousands of hours in falcon 4.0 since 1998. I’ve won dogfight pyramids and BVR tournaments so I think I know what I’m talking about a little
Aim120 performance is unchanged since OF days and won’t change
Guidances parameters have been changed around 2015 and we are investigating those changes . They are probably responsible of some termination misses when target manœuvres hard
As far as PG (probability of guidance ) is concerned , this is where 4.36 changed the game , before 4.36 aim120 were just arcade modeling , it’s now much closer to reality and oscillate between 20% and 90% depending on conditions
-
Alright, 1 more and I’m done for the evening I promise. I love you guys but it’s funny watching the replays after I get back to base (or half the time getting shot down) The final engagement where the SU-30 is at 14 miles and just turns and outruns/fakes out the slammer is kinda funny
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AYD7jqA5zxu23wOHxhJeGz-0rlqjY_yT/view?usp=share_link
-
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
As far as PG (probability of guidance ) is concerned , this is where 4.36 changed the game , before 4.36 aim120 were just arcade modeling , it’s now much closer to reality and oscillate between 20% and 90% depending on conditions
What does this mean the PG?
-
@Mav-jp In case it helps – I did just repro this first try, shooting a 120B at the C-160 transport on TR#17. (Well I made a copy of TR#17 and changed the loadout from sidewinders to amraams.)
I launched at 24nm, and it did the same weird thing I saw in OP’s acmi – missile just flew “off to the right” about 11 degrees… at moment of husky, I see on acmi it starts to try to correct back toward target… later at pitbull, it tries very hard to turn back toward target… but it’s too late and too far off course.
I flew roughly straight and level to continue supporting the missile. (altho I believe I was in RWS/SAM mode, not STT, fwiw.)
Very nice now that the acmi highlights husky/pitbull…