4.37 killed the AMRAAM
-
I turned to the north to shoot at the Mig-19s. Same thing, but missile trajectory was 12 degrees to the left… again, started to correct after pitbull, but was way off line and ofc they stopped flying straight and level and went defensive, at that moment, too.
ACMI: https://file.io/jg7jtcjI4XDc
(please ignore second half where I lose s.a. and nearly get owned by that Mig-19)
-
@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
If you rerun the ACMI through the most up to date TacView with the correct labels turned on you will see that you missed the SU-27 and the reason is write large on the screen. One shot the seeker head lost lock - outside its gimble range - just as it climbed the target dove for the deck and on TWO other occasions the missile time out, which meant you fired out side the range or just inside and then he put in the burner.
You have to be very close to get a hit with any missile if he is already cold. Put yourself in his shoes what’s the first thing you would do if you got a launch warning on your 6o’clock?
Use your TGP on 4xTV to see what he is doing and plan your attack accordingly - if you can see he is cold wait until he turns, and loses speed and has a poor attitude for out running your slammer and then launch this will increase your PK.
The A4 shot does seem odd.
Hope this helps.
Ironman
-
@WPNS24 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
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
Hi. in the 1117th we practiced exactly what the SU-30 is doing in your ACMI - it works you should copy the actions of the AI, you got shot down because, as we used to say, your were “lolly gagging” around (loitering to admire your shot) instead of getting out of there using the same evasive manoeuvres that the AI’s employ.
The 120 is not a GOD shot you still have to get it into the right parameters and remember if you are brave enough (or stupid enough, you choose) to go head to head with an SU30 if you can fire at him he can and probably will fire at you so prepare.
The one big advantage you have with you slammer over his is that he has to support his missile and you dont.
Please see my previous post for some action that might help you stay alive and even shoot the Red guys down ;0)
I am just trying to help here … so dont go launching on me, please.
Ironman
-
@airtex2019 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
I turned to the north to shoot at the Mig-19s. Same thing, but missile trajectory was 12 degrees to the left… again, started to correct after pitbull, but was way off line and ofc they stopped flying straight and level and went defensive, at that moment, too.
ACMI: https://file.io/jg7jtcjI4XDc
(please ignore second half where I lose s.a. and nearly get owned by that Mig-19)
You need to understand that before seeker going active the missile might fly several miles away from the actual target , and yeah it can happen that at hprf or mprf the real target just is outside FOv and that would be a miss
AC outrunning aim120 going cold full burner is absolutely normal if you shot outside NEZ
To visualize this just take a su27 flying cold at Mach 1.0 and watch how close you need to shoot him
We have an issue with lead guidance though that explain some wrong trajectories
-
@molnibalage said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@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.
On the margin.
1972
November – Navy breaks new ground with several first recorded during a single flight: This was the first multiple launch from an F-14A aircraft, and the first multiple launch against multiple targets by a military crew. The missile
performed satisfactorily. LCDR Donald G. Klein and Lt. Jack H. Hawyer were the F-14A crew for the historic launch.December 20 – An F-14 accomplished a ‘four-for-four’ AIM-54 test over the Pt. Mugu missile range. Flying at M0.7 and at 31,500 ft, the Tomcat launched four AIM-54s against five targets – three QT-33 and two BQM-34, each flying at M0.6 and at altitudes of between 20,000 ft and 25,000 ft. The missiles were fired at relatively short ranges, between 25 and 30 miles, and were launched in quick succession - not simultaneously. One missile scored a direct hit and the three others passed within the warheads’ lethal zones, thus scoring hits.
1973
June – Hughes completed their testing program with a world record-setting performance; launched from an F-14A over Pt. Mugu, a Phoenix missile was launched against a BQM-34E Firebee drone at a distance of 110 nautical miles. This shattered the previous record of 76 nautical miles, which was achieved during the RDT&E phase. At the time the missile had achieved a 77% success rate, with 43 scored hits out of a total of 56 missiles launched from various aircraft.
November 21 – First Phoenix proves effectiveness in full-arsenal testing on an F-14 operating over the Pacific Missile Sea Test Range. The F-14 fired six Phoenix missiles over a 38-second period and guided them simultaneously at six separate targets 50 miles away, obtaining four direct hits. Flown by CDR John R. “Smoke” Wilson and LCDR Jack Hauver, the Tomcat was flying at speed of M0.78 and an altitude of 24,800 ft - while the target drones were flying at speeds of M0.6 to M1.1. This was the only time six Phoenix were launched by a single aircraft.
Phoenix testing was completed in 1973 after a program of 60 launches
-
@Stevie said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@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).
The F-14 was used as the test plane for the AIM-120 because it had the most powerful radar. It was integrated with the F-14, but it ended up not getting it because of budget reasons. The F-14 already had an active missile with the Phoenix and A-G was a priority. The choice was either Amraam integration or A-G integration, there wasn’t enough money to do both.
The F-14 was pretty much sidelined from Desert Storm because it had no A-G role and its avionics were outdated because the NAVY didn’t update it with things like NCTR, again due to budget reasons. Because of this it wasn’t allowed to fly CAP stations in Desert Storm. The F-14 was almost retired early because of this, because politicians thought its role had played out now the the cold war was over. So when they had to choose between Amraam or A-G, they chose A-G to make the airplane relevant again after the cold war. And choosing the A-G option arguably saved it from the chopping block until it did get retired in 2006. But it did play a very prominent role in OEF and OIF because of all the added A-G capability it had received in the years after Desert Storm. The F-14’s Lantirn was more capable than the F-18. It’s display in the rear cockpit was larger and higher resolution than the F-15E and the F-14 had long legs giving the F-14 deep strike capability or long on station time capability, making it the strike platform of choice in OEF and OIF for many years. So I think they made the right decision.
With regard to the radar discussion in this thread, shouldn’t it be RWS instead of TWS? As others have hinted in this thread and linked to another thread, the TWS mode isn’t the most reliable mode to be using from what I understand.
-
@Tomcatter31 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Stevie said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@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).
The F-14 was used as the test plane for the AIM-120 because it had the most powerful radar. It was integrated with the F-14, but it ended up not getting it because of budget reasons. The F-14 already had an active missile with the Phoenix and A-G was a priority. The choice was either Amraam integration or A-G integration, there wasn’t enough money to do both.
The F-14 was pretty much sidelined from Desert Storm because it had no A-G role and its avionics were outdated because the NAVY didn’t update it with things like NCTR, again due to budget reasons. Because of this it wasn’t allowed to fly CAP stations in Desert Storm. The F-14 was almost retired early because of this, because politicians thought its role had played out now the the cold war was over. So when they had to choose between Amraam or A-G, they chose A-G to make the airplane relevant again after the cold war. And choosing the A-G option arguably saved it from the chopping block until it did get retired in 2006. But it did play a very prominent role in OEF and OIF because of all the added A-G capability it had received in the years after Desert Storm. The F-14’s Lantirn was more capable than the F-18. It’s display in the rear cockpit was larger and higher resolution than the F-15E and the F-14 had long legs giving the F-14 deep strike capability or long on station time capability, making it the strike platform of choice in OEF and OIF for many years. So I think they made the right decision.
With regard to the radar discussion in this thread, shouldn’t it be RWS instead of TWS? As others have hinted in this thread and linked to another thread, the TWS mode isn’t the most reliable mode to be using from what I understand.
Explained here the AG vs AA upgrades in post Cold War era.
-
@molnibalage said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@molnibalage said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@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.
On the margin.
1972
November – Navy breaks new ground with several first recorded during a single flight: This was the first multiple launch from an F-14A aircraft, and the first multiple launch against multiple targets by a military crew. The missile
performed satisfactorily. LCDR Donald G. Klein and Lt. Jack H. Hawyer were the F-14A crew for the historic launch.December 20 – An F-14 accomplished a ‘four-for-four’ AIM-54 test over the Pt. Mugu missile range. Flying at M0.7 and at 31,500 ft, the Tomcat launched four AIM-54s against five targets – three QT-33 and two BQM-34, each flying at M0.6 and at altitudes of between 20,000 ft and 25,000 ft. The missiles were fired at relatively short ranges, between 25 and 30 miles, and were launched in quick succession - not simultaneously. One missile scored a direct hit and the three others passed within the warheads’ lethal zones, thus scoring hits.
1973
June – Hughes completed their testing program with a world record-setting performance; launched from an F-14A over Pt. Mugu, a Phoenix missile was launched against a BQM-34E Firebee drone at a distance of 110 nautical miles. This shattered the previous record of 76 nautical miles, which was achieved during the RDT&E phase. At the time the missile had achieved a 77% success rate, with 43 scored hits out of a total of 56 missiles launched from various aircraft.
November 21 – First Phoenix proves effectiveness in full-arsenal testing on an F-14 operating over the Pacific Missile Sea Test Range. The F-14 fired six Phoenix missiles over a 38-second period and guided them simultaneously at six separate targets 50 miles away, obtaining four direct hits. Flown by CDR John R. “Smoke” Wilson and LCDR Jack Hauver, the Tomcat was flying at speed of M0.78 and an altitude of 24,800 ft - while the target drones were flying at speeds of M0.6 to M1.1. This was the only time six Phoenix were launched by a single aircraft.
Phoenix testing was completed in 1973 after a program of 60 launches
In the original test in the 70’s indeed not all Phoenix hit their target, but I seem to recall a story posted somewhere that one of the squadrons duplicated the test years later ‘to set things right’. I think it may have been VF-11 in a live fire exercise right before the Phoenix missile was retired (sometime around 2005) and they needed to get rid of them anyway. What I recall in that shoot, all missiles did hit their target. I did a search however, but can’t find anything anymore. So I’m not sure.
-
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
You need to understand that before seeker going active the missile might fly several miles away from the actual target , and yeah it can happen that at hprf or mprf the real target just is outside FOv and that would be a miss
Just to be clear, I’m not trying to debate what’s correct or not – I have no idea. Just trying to provide simple repro case.
These targets are flying straight and level (both C-160 and Mig-19s) with no nearby distractions or other influences.
I tried to repro with STT hard lock, my missiles guide true and intercept their target.
But with RWS/SAM, and TWS, the course guidance seems to be 11 or 12 degrees off – about 5nm, at 25nm range. It seems very unexpected, for targets flying so straight and level… again, I don’t know correct vs incorrect. Just trying to provide a clean case to repro and investigate.
-
It seems like the only thing this thread will ever agree on is that the AMRAAM and the Phoenix are both missiles.
-
@spotdott said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
It seems like the only thing this thread will ever agree on is that the AMRAAM and the Phoenix are both missiles.
What do you mean “missiles”?
-
@airtex2019 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
You need to understand that before seeker going active the missile might fly several miles away from the actual target , and yeah it can happen that at hprf or mprf the real target just is outside FOv and that would be a miss
Just to be clear, I’m not trying to debate what’s correct or not – I have no idea. Just trying to provide simple repro case.
These targets are flying straight and level (both C-160 and Mig-19s) with no nearby distractions or other influences.
I tried to repro with STT hard lock, my missiles guide true and intercept their target.
But with RWS/SAM, and TWS, the course guidance seems to be 11 or 12 degrees off – about 5nm, at 25nm range. It seems very unexpected, for targets flying so straight and level… again, I don’t know correct vs incorrect. Just trying to provide a clean case to repro and investigate.
As I said this Is absolutely expect and it will not be consistant because the error margin is random for each missile
So you can launch a first missile in tws which will have zero error and the second one with maximum error
Keep in mind as well that there are six independant errors build in
Error on X,Y,Z position of target
Error on Vx,Vy,Vz target velocityAll of this combine makes the interpretation impossible to do for you guys (I have special debug tools to make sure what we see match with what is coded )
You need to embrace the idea that aim120 PG can be as low as 20% if fired in tws at 15nm with DL lost up to 90% in STT with full guiding
-
@Ironman53rd Yes, this was a situation where I didn’t care if I got shot down because I would just discard the mission (which I’ve done on this exact mission over 2 dozen times now because it seems to be the perfect scenario) I’m just concerned that the SU-30 I was all over was able to “giddy-up” at 14 miles and out run 2 slammers that were at Mach-3.
I always have my TGP set as you suggested and have been trying to adapt to the new skill level of the AI (and subsequest 13g ability of their aircraft…)
The A4/AN-24 has been a constant of this 4.37 campaign and it started at the beginning of the campaign against Q5/Q7/Mig 19’s Slammers just weren’t hitting home, And of course because I knew they didn’t have better missiles I was only launching at 20 miles MAX on those shots and supporting all the way in and never defensive so the theory is something is off. Obviously seems like others are noticing this trend so I might go back and restart the campaign to have those Mig-s back (they’re all dead I assume, haven’t seen one for days)
-
@LorikEolmin Well, AIM does stand for Air Intercept Missile…
-
@airtex2019 kinda very simliar to what I was seeing on some of my early campaign flights against those Mig-19/Q5 fighters. See my reply to Ironman53rd. I was just chocking it up to what we’ve been hearing that the 120 had been nerfed and needed better FCR support and not like when I flew Falcon 3.0 (I could just hit spacebar, tab, spacebar, tab) and get 6 kills LOL. Who else remembers those days???
Back to the task at hand. Those same missile misses are exponentially magnified going against a SU-27/30.
Back to the Pit I go gents…
-
@Mav-jp said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
aim120 PG can be as low as 20% if fired in tws at 15nm with DL lost up to 90% in STT with full guiding
ok, STT good, RWS and TWS bad… got it.
does RWS->SAM offer any improvement? (seems like the radar antenna “pauses” over the bugged target briefly, with each scan, presumably to collect a higher fidelity response?)
-
@Mav-jp So I clearly hear what you’re saying and maybe the 120 hasn’t “changed” but the probability for a missile “self-error” is higher than before? Kinda like how now we get hung missiles/bombs?
By the way, being I worked weapons on the Falcon for my 20 year career I can tell you that hung bombs happen more often than the sim spits out, which I’m ok with but everyone hates a hung store because in a sim world, we want everything to work 100% of the time.
Most real world viper drivers maybe get 1 or 2 chances to shoot a live missile IRL during their careers. I deployed to WSEP twice and we never had a hung missile ( out of appx 18 shots) Now I haven’t the slightest clue on the actual number of possible hung missiles/bad missiles there are, unless we got into a real war, but I do know that a live AIM-120 does a “bit check” with the LX and aircraft to ensure it’s working correctly and as long as that passes, the missile was good
-
@Mav-jp do you know of any videos out there someone has done that could be a reliable learning tool for using the slammer correctly?
I know Lorik is in the thread now (howdy mate) but I am wondering if I’m the problem and shooting the wrong way?
-
@airtex2019 Yep, it’s almost like the AMRAAM leaves the rail in MADDOG mode and never tracks the target until Husky/Pitbull.
I’ve watched countless times now with Shift7 to watch what the slammer is doing and it’s mind boggling
-
@WPNS24 said in 4.37 killed the AMRAAM:
By the way, being I worked weapons on the Falcon for my 20 year career I can tell you that hung bombs happen more often than the sim spits out, which I’m ok with but everyone hates a hung store because in a sim world, we want everything to work 100% of the time.
Most real world viper drivers maybe get 1 or 2 chances to shoot a live missile IRL during their careers. I deployed to WSEP twice and we never had a hung missile ( out of appx 18 shots) Now I haven’t the slightest clue on the actual number of possible hung missiles/bad missiles there are, unless we got into a real war, but I do know that a live AIM-120 does a “bit check” with the LX and aircraft to ensure it’s working correctly and as long as that passes, the missile was good