A-A Missiles doubts.
-
In BMS ….
1.) From what I’ve read chaff has little or no effect on active missiles, but some (modest) effect on AC radar and/or SARH IF used with other techniques such as beaming or cranking.
2.) Depends. Some missiles, like the AIM-120 and AA-12 Adder have a Home on Jam capability. If your jammer is on, it just makes your a bigger target. Regards AC, the general conventional wisdom seems to be that turning on the jammer is like turning on a flashlight (torch) in a dark room … if they didn’t know you were there, they will now. OTOH, once you’ve been spotted/painted, the Jammer can make it more difficult to get/hold a long range lock.
-
…the general conventional wisdom seems to be that turning on the jammer is like turning on a flashlight (torch) in a dark room … if they didn’t know you were there, they will now.
True, at 50-40NM with jammer on you are like screaming ‘I’m here!’, at 25-30NM the self protection ECM pod is good for you (in BMS at least, in RL - depends on the launching platform’s radar’s ECCM).
1. “Chaffs” work creating a “false” eco for the radar confunding it. Am I right? If yes, are chaff more effectie against AHM like the AMRAAM than SAHM missiles like the Sparrow?
You are right about how chaff works. However modern ARH missiles and highly computerized fire control radars can discriminate between ‘chaff and aircraft’. Regarding the SARH missiles - they receive echo from the target after painted by the launching platform’s radar, so if you ‘beat’ the latter then you should be good to go
-
I open this post in order to ask some things concerning missiles in real world and his representation on BMS. Hope is the correct place, If not feel free to put this post where it belongs.
1. “Chaffs” work creating a “false” eco for the radar confunding it. Am I right? If yes, are chaff more effectie against AHM like the AMRAAM than SAHM missiles like the Sparrow? I mean, is not easier to spoof the radar of the missile than the more powerful aircraft radar?
I’m no expert, but AFAIK, chaff will create a lot of uneven surfaces, scattering the radio wave all over the place. It may appear on RADAR and when that happens, you can lock/fire onto it, but modern Doppler RADAR should be able to recognize chaff and not display it as a contact.
The main purpose of chaff, however (to my knowledge), is that it should hide whatever is behind. If I’m not mistaken, there is a tactical procedure in which several aircraft come in first with the sole purpose of dropping massive amounts of chaff, creating a wall after which the attack force can set up and prepare pretty much “unnoticed” (in terms of amount and exact location of aircraft).
Given my knowledge is correct, what chaff will do when you fire a missile into that direction is create an obstacle beyond which the RADAR can not see. It can disregard it, but the actual target will remain hidden until the RADAR is able to get a direct line-of-sight (LoS), e.g. after passing the chaff cloud.
When you’re working against a SARH-missile, that would mean you only need to obstruct the LoS of the aircraft RADAR. If you’re defending against an ARH-missile, however, you need to block LoS of both aircraft (until it stops guiding) and missile RADAR, which is a lot harder obviously. -
…there is a tactical procedure in which several aircraft come in first with the sole purpose of dropping massive amounts of chaff, creating a wall after which the attack force can set up and prepare pretty much “unnoticed”…
True tactic but not used actively as I know since WWII (heck, even the Russians don’t do it anymore :D) Nowadays radars are too smart for that.
The main purpose of chaff, however (to my knowledge), is that it should hide whatever is behind.
The angle of the LOS of ground based radars is not 0 degrees in relation to the flight path of the target aircraft even at long ranges. To hide the target one has to ‘throw the chaff into the line of sight of the painter’. Anyhow the ‘obscuring’ qualities of chaff on modern day radars is questionable at best, old systems however are susceptible to it and that’s the reason they have chaff around anyway
-
Does anybody know if the “F4_Sensor_Properties.xls” that came with realism patch v5 is still valid?
-
The ARH missiles in BMS4 immunte to chaff because of the code. Reagrdless what sensor modeling value you set, they simply relock you within fraction of a second. So never use chaff against ARH missiles because it is simply pointless. RP5 is not valid here sadly. This is one of the main reason why I never will play in AMRAAM era…
SARH missiles at longer-med distance are pretty vulnerable to chaff even without ECM just do it in ground clutter and beaming. I think this part of Falcon is good and was good in all Falcon versions. Only problem that most of campaigns are in AMRAAM era and most of blue AC fly with AIM-120…
IR missiles up from AIM-9M and R-73 are literally imune to flares because of modeling values… In case of different values they could be better but with current code ARH missiles are holy weapons in Falcon universe.
Does anybody know if the “F4_Sensor_Properties.xls” that came with realism patch v5 is still valid?
RP5 is mostly still valid.
-
Great, I’m reading the manual and man what a wealth of useful information is in that document. Hats off to the writers.
-
Thanks for the info guys!
-
hah, that Flare video is kind of ridiculous… I sincerely hope to see in a few weeks that something has been done about this!
-
hah, that Flare video is kind of ridiculous… I sincerely hope to see in a few weeks that something has been done about this!
Sadly BMS4 Team won’t change modeling values even it is 100% obvious that current state is lightyear aways from RL cases… In my Korea '80s Theater I reworked literally the whole database to get a better and more real environment, in my theater are not holy weapons even SA-10 can be defeated and of course none of SARH and IR missiles are so powerful.
-
I open this post in order to ask some things concerning missiles in real world and his representation on BMS. Hope is the correct place, If not feel free to put this post where it belongs.
1. “Chaffs” work creating a “false” eco for the radar confunding it. Am I right? If yes, are chaff more effectie against AHM like the AMRAAM than SAHM missiles like the Sparrow? I mean, is not easier to spoof the radar of the missile than the more powerful aircraft radar?
2. When is better to use the ECM gear? Before you’re painted, once you started to get painted, or once you hae a confirmed shoot against you?
Well for one thing, the missile radar and the jets radar operate at different frequencies. Chaff has to be cut to a specific length to reflect a specific frequency wave.
Chaff bundles thus tend to contain chaffs cut to different lengths, to affect the maximum useful frequencies. Still, just letting you know its entirely possible IRL for chaff to screw up a fire control radar and not affect a missile radar in the slightest.
As for when to use ECM gear, this is a pretty nuanced topic. What type of ECM equipment? what type of threat are you being attacked by?
For instance, switching on a noise jammer to defeat an AMRAAM in the terminal stage would be pretty suicidal - but using an advanced deception jammer in the same conditions is SOP.
Do a google search for ‘Electronic Warfare Fundamentals’ - the first result is a book that should help you out with this, as well as any number of other related questions.
-
Sadly BMS4 Team won’t change modeling values even it is 100% obvious that current state is lightyear aways from RL cases… In my Korea '80s Theater I reworked literally the whole database to get a better and more real environment, in my theater are not holy weapons even SA-10 can be defeated and of course none of SARH and IR missiles are so powerful.
….
I seriously doubt you can defeat a SA-10 IRL. Best realistic tactic is not to get shot at.
What is missing for IR missiles is weather effects, humidity, and so on. But modelling values are not so far off. Look how many flares are needed to lure one 9M in poor weather :
A 2% flare chance is not so unrealistic then. Not to mention the code do take into account engine RPM and burner into account for the IR signature and flare chance as well…. did you even test that ?
But there are not holy weapons, only poor tactics. You always say the slammer is a holy weapon. Well, in the last 5 BVR trainings I did with 09th WTAC, I had something like 20 slammers shot at me, and 20 shot by me. Hit ratio on me and by me was 10%, and it was mistakes on my part or on my target’s part. Is a 10% hit rate a sign of a holy weapon ?
I’m not even mentionning the slammer head-on avoidance, which is a total heresy we do no use, and relies only on the poor missile modeling values. I’m talking about knowing when an enemy can get a dangerous shot at you, and turning away before.
IRL, missiles ARE deadly. And most missiles in F4 are not nearly as deadly as they should be. In trainings, IRL, a missile shot within hit parameters means a kill. Why do you think that is, if modern missiles were so poor ? Its not the 70s anymore… In F4, ATM, most SHORADs or MANPADs are almost useless. But I dont see you complaining about that.
So no, most seeker modeling values wont change, and for good reasons. And if you are sad about it, well, too bad.
-
I seriously doubt you can defeat a SA-10 IRL. Best realistic tactic is not to get shot at.
You believe what you wish but so far nobody was able to develop weapon with 100% hit and kill ratio… Also regardless how hardcore sim BMS4 this is still “only” a game. Gameplay wise my aspect is very simple. I cannot accept weapons which cannot be defeated but only one way. If a missile based on parially EM technology it is insane that is 100% ECM resistance. The Growler and new ECM pods are exist for a good reason…
What is missing for IR missiles is weather effects, humidity, and so on. But modelling values are not so far off. Look how many flares are needed to lure one 9M :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t8d…tailpage#t=244Yes, sadly these are missing in all flight sims today.
I know this video. About a dozen was enough - as was during ODS - the AC just dropped as many as could. It does not mean that after the first dozen the later had any effect because missile simply missed the target long before that… Simply check the flight time of the missile…A 2% flare chance is not so unrealistic then.
No, it is TOTALLY unreal. Besides flare chance is aspect, RPM and distance modifier and may some what I do not know… Pls do the same test ten times with Su-25 what I did. When I made the video I tried as I can remember 15 times at least to capture just a single miss. I dropped about 1500 flares and result was 0 miss…
During ODS multiple times defeated Iraqi fighters defeated best AIM-9M of late '80s with only a half a dozen or dozens of flare even AAMs were launched in tail aspect and fighters used afterburner… In Falcon you cannot defeat AIM-9M even your fly with idle RPM… The gap between Falcon and RL as wide as the Pacific Ocean is…
But there are not holy weapons, only poor tactics. You always say the slammer is a holy weapon. Well, in the last 5 BVR trainings I did with 09th WTAC, I had something like 20 slammers shot at me, and 20 shot by me. Hit ratio on me and by me was 10%, and it was mistakes on my part or on my target’s part. Is a 10% hit rate a sign of a holy weapon ?
Your only chance is kinematic defeat. In case somebody launch them edge or outside of NEZ what do you expect especially in case your RWR literally says 100% good accuracy where the incoming missile is…?
IRL, missiles ARE deadly.
Check this statistic. And most of target did not have even dispensers. The only question is the launch range considering NEZ and DLC.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/grlx9uyt34yimge/AAM-stats.zipAnd most missiles in F4 are not nearly as deadly as they should be.
I can achive 100% hit ratio against 4th gen. jets without any issue. The only thing what I have to care the missile kinematics…
In trainings, IRL, a missile shot within hit parameters means a kill.
Yes, maybe te latest generations, but what about older missiles? The answer is no way….!
Why do you think that is, if modern missiles were so poor ? Its not the 70s anymore……
AIM-9M is “only” and upgraded AIM-9L and origin of R-73 is late '70s…
-
I seriously doubt you can defeat a SA-10 IRL.
Well, the system hasn’t been tested on an actual manned maneuvering jet yet but the range firings are pretty impressive nonetheless Certainly no chaff or mainstream ECM spook the S300’s or S400’s radars, heck the priority targets for the new iterations of the S300s and the new S400s are EW aircraft, AWACS’.
As for flares - there are different flavors of them to address different specters of the light waves, so not all kind of flares are useless on modern IR missiles. -
hah, that Flare video is kind of ridiculous… I sincerely hope to see in a few weeks that something has been done about this!
Modern IR missiles and latest ARH missiles are almost totally immune to chaff / flares. Not the same as in the sim but results are very similar: It will maybe give you the 1% to 10% of chance to MAYBE defeat the missile.
IRL it is not used like we do in our video games … IRL, nowadays, chaff/flares are just something that could save your life but missiles’AD are equipped with highly efficient CCM able to reject any (most) of decoys attempts.1st is to not enter the threat envelope, once you are into the firing envelope, do not rely on decoys to get you get you safe out of there in all cases.
-
Molni, again and again, you still stuck with ODS era. You have no idea how things have change since.
On my side, I have some clue, and one of it tell that AIM-9M is more more strong against flare that do you think.On other side, Falcon is not a OSD / 70 flightsim, but if you like something like that, it’s up to you to make your own mod on your side. But accept that is not the guideline follow by the BMS team. You are not the only one that have informations.
-
What everyone forgets, in that discussion of “holly” weapons and how it compares to RL, is how the probabiliy ot kill of a weapon is made up of several factors. Just to name few….radar support, relative energy between attacker and target at the launch, geometry, range, use of ECM/ECCM, hit geometry, type of warhead etc. A comparison between RL engagement outcomes with F4 ones is very difficult, if not impossible. F4 does not simulate many of these factors.
On the other hand, the outcome of 2D and 3D engagements in F4 should give in average a similar result. This does not always happen in BMS (or in any other F4 version of the past). The 2D stats should be tuned to mirror what happens in the 3D world (surely for Ai vs Ai, perhaps in some cases Ai vs human).
My 2 cents.
-
Molni, again and again, you still stuck with ODS era.
The DB is filled with ODS era weapons and because of lack of subtypes… For ex. there is no AIM-9L…
You have no idea how things have change since.
I have. I can live with holy AIM-9X but as R-73 and AIM-9M…? Eh…
-
@mookar:
True tactic but not used actively as I know since WWII (heck, even the Russians don’t do it anymore :D) Nowadays radars are too smart for that.
The US used this a lot during Linebacker II - however on some occasions the wind blew the cover away exposing the B-52s
B-52s in ECM cells carrying their own chaff was more effective.
-
….
I’m not even mentionning the slammer head-on avoidance, which is a total heresy we do no use, and relies only on the poor missile modeling values. I’m talking about knowing when an enemy can get a dangerous shot at you, and turning away before.IRL, missiles ARE deadly. And most missiles in F4 are not nearly as deadly as they should be. In trainings, IRL, a missile shot within hit parameters means a kill. Why do you think that is, if modern missiles were so poor ? Its not the 70s anymore… In F4, ATM, most SHORADs or MANPADs are almost useless. But I dont see you complaining about that.
So no, most seeker modeling values wont change, and for good reasons. And if you are sad about it, well, too bad.
Yes agree with this the A-A missiles in BMS are long way from Holy - and the MANPADs are LOL
IR missiles that use Imaging seekers look very difficult for flares to defeat despite the different types of flares now in use - anything that doesn’t though you could expect to still be spoofed to an extent by modern flare types.