Possible active radar missile bug (very serious issue)
-
This is just my noob fell but i think that hard lock is way too easy to break , those semi-active missiles and sams will never be threat for player.
-
This is just my noob fell but i think that hard lock is way too easy to break , those semi-active missiles and sams will never be threat for player.
haukka81, what is your technique for breaking lock against semi-active missiles? Does it include a particular chaff/flare program? Semi-active give me more trouble than active. thks.
-
Semi-active give me more trouble than active
At small distance maybe but above 5-6 nm a simple dive + ECM + beaming after the dive gives you quite a good chance.
-
@Axe:
haukka81, what is your technique for breaking lock against semi-active missiles? Does it include a particular chaff/flare program? Semi-active give me more trouble than active. thks.
What molni says, works well , very easy to beam those. My chaff program is 6 chaff / 0.25 seconds
-haukka81
-
thanks molnibalage, that’s what I do but with mixed results, mostly not too good. But I’m not dropping chaff as many or as fast as haukka81 (thanks for sharing the program with me).
I’m going to change my chaff program. Glad that I asked:)
-
Hey Molni,
I’m almost 100% sure that active radar missile are 100% immune against chaff which means a major bug. I tested AC radars with 0.99 chaff chance value with AIM-7 and happened what I expected. Single chaff was able to break radar lock and caused a miss. I created a 3 x 3 F-15C TE and all missile defeated easily on bothd sides regardless of distance or relative position.
I set the same 0.99 value of AIM-120 and runned the same TE. Regardless I dropped dozens of chaff within 1-2 sec missiles never lost the lock on me and of course AI also was not able defeat any AIM-120 with decoys. I think the results are very definite.
I’m not sure but as I can remember OF had different chaff from BMS4 has currently. During the developing FF I found 100% same issue in a beta version of FF. FF devs changed the chaff and caused somehow the bug. What a coincidance, isn’t it?
I can record tests with many different missiles and AC if it is required.
had a look at this…
Enabled some debug output in EXE and flew a dogfight match F-16C-52 (combat AP) vs. Typhoon (AI), F-16 had 2 AIM-120, Typhoon 2 Meteor loaded.
Could see one of the Meteors launched by typhoon locked onto a flare…So code does work in general, maybe you can have a look what is different in seeker data AIM-120 vs. BVRAAM.
Cheers
Biker -
Enabled some debug output in EXE and flew a dogfight match F-16C-52 (combat AP) vs. Typhoon (AI), F-16 had 2 AIM-120, Typhoon 2 Meteor loaded.
There is no Meteor in released BMS4 version. Are you speaking about BVRAAM* weapon? It has Meteor shaped 3D model.
If ARH is locked on to a flare is problem. During test I did not used dispenser programs what I dropped chaff I also dropped flares in manual mode. Decoys had 0 effect on ARHs. I will try with differe ARHs.
-
Hi Molni,
There is no Meteor in released BMS4 version. Are you speaking about BVRAAM* weapon? It has Meteor shaped 3D model.
If ARH is locked on to a flare is problem. During test I did not used dispenser programs what I dropped chaff I also dropped flares in manual mode. Decoys had 0 effect on ARHs. I will try with differe ARHs.
Meteor = BVRAAM = ARH missile and for such chaff has an effect!!!
Just you cannot see why missile does loose track on target, but with debug output I could see.Cheers
Biker -
How can I activate the debug mode?
The correlation between the chaff and loosing the lock is quite obvious. If you cannot use chaff an ARH never loose the lock on you. Never. Simply the modeling values does not make possible. You can fly in ground clutter, you can do beaming, it does not matter. When you drop some chaff then the lock instantly breaks it is 100% obvious why happened especially if I’m not in ground clutter, I’m not perfoming beam turn and I’m not using ECM. You can eliminate certain effect during the tests.
-
I just tested in MP. I made two video record. I set 0.99 chaff chance for AIM-120. Effect was 100% the same as in single player. Within some sec me and the other player used the 60 chaff but the lock did not was broken.
-
Some test were done wit BVRAAM. I set 0.99 chaff chance.
Sometimes the chaff worked but mostly did not. It seemed me during the test if the launch AC used its radar in TWS or RWS mode and bugged the target after the missile lock was broken - just for a fraction of a second or a second - somehow the missile relocked again the target and become immue to chaff.
If the launcher turned off its radar launched the missile in BORE mode while radar was turned off sometimes chaff worked, but not every time.
AIM-120 never lost the lock.
I will test with AI AIM-54, MICA and Meteor either, but the results so far are conclusive to me, ARHs mostly do not work as should do.
-
With AMRAAM’s comment about high-altitude problems, it seems the 120 needs to be seriously looked at.
Why even bother with real-world tactics when the sim doesn’t model it properly?
-
It seemed me during the test if the launch AC used its radar in TWS or RWS mode and bugged the target after the missile lock was broken - just for a fraction of a second or a second - somehow the missile relocked again the target and become immue to chaff.
The issue is 100% visible and reproducible against MICA EM and AIM-54. At ~10 nm radar goes active, I drop some chaff ‘M’ disappears but at about ~6-7 nm relock me, but the missile and in this phase is immune to chaff. Missiles which go active at smaller distance - R-77 (AA-12) - you cannot brake the radar lock.
-
OK had a closer look…
Radar data chaff chance is multiplied with a factor which is dependent on missile to target range.
| RNG [nm]
| 0.00
| 1.97
| 3.95
| 7.90
| 19.75
|
| Factor
| 0.00
| 0.00
| 0.75
| 0.75
| 0.00
|Means chaffs are most efficient between 4 and 8 nm, if missile is closer or farther from target chaff chance does decrease.
This is same for all types if missiles and seekers.Cheers
Biker -
I know, but what I say 7.9 nm is more or less exacty the distance where AIM-54 goes active again after I have defeated and immune to chaff regardless I drop dozens or all 60 between 4-8 nm distance.
Should I recored video about all type of ARHs…? Believe me, ARH does not work as in older Falcon. When I tested with same values in FF4 or FF5 missiles were defeated. In BMS4 they are not. Even with original modeling values - which means about 0.05 chaff chance - in FF4/FF5 if you set very small time gap between releases and use them in ground clutter and instanteniously afther ‘M’ appeared on RWR the defeat was possible. In BMS4 with 0.99 is impossible except the one case what I described.
-
Should I make comparison videos with older Falcon versions? What do you wish?
-
I know it’s slightly off-topic, but I’d like to know why the 120 isn’t modeled better, period.
Having zero difference in performance from 25,000 ft and up is bogus. Considering the AIM-120 is the primary AAM for BLUFOR in the sim, it is unacceptable to have such a deficiency.
Firing from M1.2, 38k feet at a head-on target from 13 miles and having it turn and run away and beat the 120 is nonsense.
-
Why do you think that in RL AIM-120 have bigger kinematic range…? Baby, this is the reality against targets which can collapse your DLZ…
-
Because we have real feedback about that.
-
In this case try the FM what you can find in suggestion thread…