Possible active radar missile bug (very serious issue)
-
You tell me?
Are you trying to say that chaffs won’t work anyway. So the whole discussion is void? -
well, if it uses a PD radar, then chaffs traveling at about 0 GS will be ignored as “ground clutter”… the chaff is effectively beaming.
IF it is a PD radar, then yes, chaff is pointless IRL.
thats why I ask, I have no idea what type of radar the AIM-120 uses (though its an important question for any missile seeker radar really)
-
I really have no clue.
Neither has Google as far as I can see. -
Regardless if the chaff is ignored as ground or not, can the aim120 radar see through the chaff “cloud” and keep the lock on the ac on the other side? If the chaff is between the ac and the aim120 that is.
Afaik the chaff is not a decoy as the flare meaning that the chaff is not a “new” target for the missile?Cheers
-
Hell, even war SHIPS use chaff to evade incoming anti ship missiles and those have much bigger radar on board and ship is huge target… it is BS that Aim-120/AA-12 small radar ignores chaff cloud front of it. Period.
-
Ok, I started record again. Just for sure I make the same test first what I have done 5+ years ago with FF4. Even with original modeling value if you set 0.050 BI and 10/20/30 or simlary big BQ and release all chaff withit 2-3 sec you can defeat R-77. From 5 attempts 2 were successful even AI launched two R-77s. Both was defeated by chaff. Yes, with original values.
Just try the same in BMS4…
I will show what happens in FF4 if you set high chaff chance for ARH.
In BMS4 I wil show only the high chaff chance because the other is pointless and of course I will show the SARH missile to see which is working is which is not.
Stand by for the video.
-
http://www.mediafire.com/watch/9wfngt63w4cm1sw/FF4-test.mp4
You can see these events in case the ARH code works.
-
Regardless if the chaff is ignored as ground or not, can the aim120 radar see through the chaff “cloud” and keep the lock on the ac on the other side? If the chaff is between the ac and the aim120 that is.
Afaik the chaff is not a decoy as the flare meaning that the chaff is not a “new” target for the missile?Cheers
easily, if it is PD radar then all it needs is the return pulses at a different frequency.
the chaff does not block all signals, its just intended to confuse the return - which if the return has different frequencies, at different times… one is ignored for being ground, one is classed a target.
pretty sure we did this topic a while back, and even referenced that doc that DeeJay posted about fundamentals of Electronic Warfare…
-
Human or AI? inside NEZ?
for a human at least, you can dodge the AIM-120 with little effort. when you see the M on your RWR, break for the deck and burn….
Various AI, just outside R^TR. MiG-25s will turn and run once the missile goes active and outrun it every time. A few times I have seen F-16s pass the AIM-120 head-on and just magically dodge it.
-
http://www.mediafire.com/watch/ov4s65dzwk1kdra/BMS4-test.mp4
Test with BMS4. Is it enough clear what the problem is? IHMO have to be blind not to see the problem…
-
Test with BMS4. Is it enough clear what the problem is? IHMO have to be blind not to see the problem…
Since I read this thread and BlueWolf triggering me to dive into the world of radars, I found the AIM120 is (supposedly) using a Monopulse radar, which is supposed to be harder to jam. Monopulse is distantly comparable with conical scanning, where the beams are at an offset with the targets. Having a better return on one side, means the target has moved and the radar instantly has a means of tracking.
The internal computer of the AIM120 is able to calculate lead pursuit using all the data that is fed into the computer and give it a homing solution.The Conical scanning and this monopulse (this in lesser degree) can be confused by other objects moving through the beam.
However I’m sure missile designers are much smarter than me and would have figured out some software to make the missile try to ignore clutter and very very sudden changes in velocity vector. Making the missile ‘smart’.
There must be limits though!In the video you put the missile on the beam and pump your chaffs.
Given the theory above, about Mono Pulse, this would mean a VERY sudden change in flight direction of a radar return due to the chaffs. The designers would very likely be able to filter such things. So the missile would ignore such a change and keep tracking it’s original target.Try the following (And I will do the some thing btw…this subject really caught my attention):
- Make exectly the same setup as you did
- Setup your Chaff program to make a constant stream of chaffs for atleast 6 seconds
- Put the missile on the beam
- Start the chaffs program
- …wait ONE second
- make a HARD level turn away from the missile (DO NOT CLIMB IN THE TURN)
This will put you relative speed to the sensor to 0
A whole cloud of chaffs blocks the sensor from left to right
There is no relative movement of any object
Missle will go straight of atleast maintain it’s ‘former’ turn to track you
You get a chance to surviveLike with Flare…just popping them in full AB won’t work that well. Cutting the power and popping has a greater effect in falcon. So I expect (and hope) a similar modelation of the chaffs.
IF this effect of the chaffs is modeled in falcon, it should theoretically work.
Otherwise…you did convince me.
Ill post my findings ASAP aswell.Disclaimer:
I came up with this simply by connecting the info I found on the Web. I have no real knowledge about the AIM120 whatsoever. -
100% pointless what you posted. In BMS4 chaff does not work agains ARH. It is clearly seen in videos what I posted.
-
Is that based on a dev saying “Yup the code is broken”? Or purely on a possibly wrong procedure as you posted in the video?
Looking at the basic on how the radar works on the AIM120, putting it on the beam and just popping chaffs is not going to help you.Ill waste some time trying my little sequence, post the ACMI file and we’ll see from there.
If that consequenty fails you may very well be right IMO. -
This will put you relative speed to the sensor to 0
A whole cloud of chaffs blocks the sensor from left to right
There is no relative movement of any object
Missle will go straight of atleast maintain it’s ‘former’ turn to track you
You get a chance to surviveThis is going to be really tough to do, as it would have to include the altitude of the missle as well as it’s horizontal beam status.
I tried for hours today something similar, but from rear aspect, not side as in beam. I wanted to hide in front of chaff long enough for lock to drop. From reviewing ACMI film it quickly became clear that to put chaff between me and bandit/missle requires some real SA and better flying than I normally can do.
I think I’ll try your way though for a bit and see, I can’t say no it won’t!
-
Is that based on a dev saying “Yup the code is broken”? Or purely on a possibly wrong procedure as you posted in the video?
Looking at the basic on how the radar works on the AIM120, putting it on the beam and just popping chaffs is not going to help you.Ill waste some time trying my little sequence, post the ACMI file and we’ll see from there.
If that consequenty fails you may very well be right IMO.I started to feel that I simply wasting my time…
Is is so hard to see that in FF4 and older Falcon version even with stock modeling values you can defeat ARH by chaff…? Is it so hard to see that in FF4 if you set different chaff value happens what you can expect…? You set higher value and ARH can be defeated only with some chaff, beaming and ground clutter is not neccessary.
Is it sooooo hard to see that in BMS4 chaff chance value is indifferent nothing happens even if you set 0.99?
I did not record ACMI because it does not show what you can see or RWR. So, what should I record on ACMI with what version to see that chaff does not work against ARH in BMS4…?
-
I started to feel that I simply wasting my time…
Is is so hard to see that in FF4 and older Falcon version even with stock modeling values you can defeat ARH by chaff…? Is it so hard to see that in FF4 if you set different chaff value happens what you can expect…? You set higher value and ARH can be defeated only with some chaff, beaming and ground clutter is not neccessary.
Is it sooooo hard to see that in BMS4 chaff chance value is indifferent nothing happens even if you set 0.99?
I did not record ACMI because it does not show what you can see or RWR. So, what should I record on ACMI with what version to see that chaff does not work against ARH in BMS4…?
I don’t really care about chaff.
imo, chaff is some kind of randomizer. Missiles hits would be decided on a flip of a coin and not on some huge mathematical formula that includes:
pre-launch range: range and energy advantage (missile motor model)
missile in-flight: range of last support guidance and pursuit program (missile’s radar and internal guidance model)
missile and target intersection: missile’s and target’s energy, aspect, turn rates/radius at closure speed. (missile FM)
missile damage: target speed and missile aspect. (damage model)
*all that -pole stuff….seems to be the way F4AF did itWouldn’t you rather want to adjust these variables?
Then improve AI dodging.
Then add chaff and CM. -
I don’t really care about chaff.
In this case I do not have to read further… Would you not care about IR chance values if they do not work wither…?
Wouldn’t you rather want to adjust these variables?
Then improve AI dodging.
Then add chaff and CM.You simply do not understand the point of thred. This is a bug report and not feautre tweaking thread. BTW I have tried imporve what you mentioned.
-
I think that you’ve made your case. The videos in most cases showed beam + chaff, and normally I wouldn’t count that as it could be just the beam that does it. But I can’t get BMS beam + chaff to work not once so far, so I’ll count your FF beam + chaff as a working example. You did have a couple examples where it looked like just chaff did the trick.
Now it is up to someone to show example of chaff working in BMS. I thought I saw something yesterday, like what Ed1 mentioned. I’m going looking for it today.
-
Is is so hard to see…
Is it sooooo hard to understand people ARE infact trying to help you?
I spend the last few hours trying to defeat the AIM-120 using chaffs, the way I purposed.
The procedure really ain’t that hard. I put a stream of flares exactly between me and the missile. I used exactly 18 chaffs through the procedure.
I repeat the test about 30 times. I lost count. The first few was just to get the hang of it.
This is what happend:- I lofted a missile at 21nm with 20 degrees of pitch
- The enemy missile was launched at 17 miles with me keeping the enemy on the gimbals. Exactly at that point I was able to snip my missile for a cheapshot (aka Husky)
- I put the hostile on my beam
- ‘M’ came on my RWR. I started my little sequence.
- In the cockpit (RWR) it seemed like the missile lost me for a fraction of a second as I reached the point where the chaffs are between me and the missile
- In ACMI the Missile’s tracking seems to be choppy at exactly that point. Briefly.
- I defeated the missile after making a second simmelar turn without chaffs. Hostile was destroyed.
On a side note. I never really expected to survive. I count my self as a dead man when an AIM120 is fired at me THAT close and still I survived.
Looking at the effect of chaffs, if there is any, it is minimum. Maybe just enough to gain an advantage and survive.
Not sure if the choppyness in tracking was just a coincidence or the actual effect of chaffs.
Not using chaffs with my manouver gave me less survivability. (4 deaths vs 8 shots, while without chaffs is was 7 vs
These number don’t mean anything really! Maybe I just screwed it up.
Tried to do it with double the chaffs…and there was no real difference.Unless someone knows more about the AIM120’s radar (is it or is it not doppler??) and the AIM120 in general…
I go with Molnibalage. Something doesn’t seem right
Now…leave it to the devs. -
Do not expect change soon.