Setting up counter measures
-
Applied to BMS, this means the in-game program recommendations would be …. ???
I wish I knew! Effective testing is difficult or tedious. I’m half afraid to learn some inconvenient truth like snarble’s rumor to cause me to “game the system.”
Instead this is my thought process. I look at the 60/30 C/F count and figure they are in units of 2 or 3. At no point would I consider a single countermeasure as adequate to protect me. Let’s consider them pairs. 30/15 C/F “units.”
A possible threat matrix consists of say Apex/Alamo. At 400KT 675fps you get approx 100’ spacing at 0.150s. That’s a double fighter sized target (juicy but plausible). TOF on a threat missile is likely pretty long. This will be a program suited for automatic continuous dispensing. At 15 deg/sec turn rate a 30 deg turn can be accomplished in 2.0s which is a good time to allow a change of direction after every burst.
Thinking
BQ 4
BI 0.100
SQ 1
SI 2.000I was going to say BQ 2 but I remembered my rule about “don’t be a miser.” So the missile sees a 100-200’ long stretch of chaff every two seconds going different directions if you’re bobbin’ and weavin’. This program will eat through the 60 chaff in 15 seconds which is a good two moderate radar missile defenses. In real life bunching CMs is more effective than even distributions except for some longer term denial programs. Maybe against lower threats 250ms burst 2 is enough.
If the threats included AA-6 (IR) that would definitely include flares or a separate program if MiG-25s were encountered.
Planning out the programs
PGM 1 Auto A/A
PGM 2 Auto A/S
PGM 3 Manual or Alternate A/A
PGM 4 Manual or Alternate A/S
PGM 5 General purpose bugout mix
PGM 6 Short flare program for dogfight or MANPADThe quick threat guide lists various missile CM vulnerabilities to scale your CM density to the threat. Against AA-2 you can go much lighter on the burst size. Against AA-11 you basically want to shotgun enough flares to rival the Sun. Manual programs that respond to situations should be long enough in total duration to be ignored safely for several seconds but not longer than expected threat duration. A reaction to MANPAD program that lasts longer than 3-4 seconds is silly. It either hit you or not by now.
-
This post is deleted! -
In the “real world” each of these programs are based on the known threat within the theater of operation. The reason for these programs is so you don’t have to push your CMS multiple times. Rather just a “one & done; maneuver then another one if necessary” mentality.
So…my question to BMS developers, based on the “threat” is how are the missiles, whether radar or IR guided, mapped within the game??? What info would the intel officer (virtually speaking) pass on to weapons & tactics and the mission planners to program into the CMDS???
-
What info would the intel officer (virtually speaking) pass on to weapons & tactics and the mission planners to program into the CMDS???
AFAIK, there is a way to calculate what should be the best/optimal sequence (sometimes impossible to set it because is requiring too many decoys, so compromises has to be made : efficiency vs costs). But honestly, I do not know how to do.
Other way is … experiments.
-
Rumour has it that radar and IR missiles in falcon only register one chaff, or one flare, so dumping more than that and you’re just wasting them.
Not true … Dee-jay or somebody can confirm
-
Not true … Dee-jay or somebody can confirm
Sequence, numbers of decoys, spacing, burst ripples has a impact on the % of effectiveness.
One flare is not equal to five flares and not equal to five flares released with a different interval.
At least, this is what I have been told. But can’t tell you more.
-
Rumour has it that radar and IR missiles in falcon only register one chaff, or one flare, so dumping more than that and you’re just wasting them.
Rumour is deeply wrong.
-
With some math, you can do EWMS prog for each threat. And yes, it work. But it will never be a 100% evasive tool, depending of the threat and the number of chaff / flare you have, you can increase the probability to break the lock of the radar / seeker, but it will never be a 100% solution.
-
With some math, you can do EWMS prog for each threat. And yes, it work. But it will never be a 100% evasive tool, depending of the threat and the number of chaff / flare you have, you can increase the probability to break the lock of the radar / seeker, but it will never be a 100% solution.
& the formula is??
It goes without saying that nothing is 100%. Part of evading a missile is the tactics used in combination with chaff &/or flare. Whether the tactic is to weave back & forth keeping the missile on the rear-beam, popping off a series of chaff/flare with each turn, or turn & buring in full AB while popping off a single chaff bundle every few seconds (which I would never recommend!) there must (should) be a certain program setting that gives you a fighting chance against a group of missile (E.G. AA-11/AMRAAM generation; AA-7/Sparrow gen; SA-2/-3/-4 gen; SA-7 gen; SA-14/-16 gen; etc…)
When someone has the time to run some scenarios in a Weapon’s School style TE please feel free to post your results!
Cheers
Jolly -
the trick is to evade the missle before it is even shot.
with modern electronic and sensor capabilities of missles comes less effectiveness of your countermeasures. in bms the mathmatical decoy chance is so low e.g. aim9x or aim120, that i would almost suggest dont bother dropping any, even in high repetitieve quantities, but ofcourse you will. however against threat fire control radar this chance is generally a bit higher e.g. SA2.
-
You not fight agains’t a missile (exept for IR). But agains’t the radar of the fighter who fire at you. Think about it ;).
-
When someone has the time to run some scenarios in a Weapon’s School style TE please feel free to post your results!
I did some tests and I was hardly ever able to break the lock of any incoming ARH missile. SARH missiles can be done by beaming, chaffing and working into the vertical (making your speed in the horizontal plane technically zero).
If you break the lock of the firing aircraft on a ARH shot AND chaff AND change direction, there is some chance for success if you do it right.
Pop some chaffs when you see the “M” thoughIf you chaff too early, it will re-aquire you. If you chaff too late, your signature is too big already. A good rule of thumb is 3-5 miles out on a ARH missile. You should have a decent speed with high LOS rates for the missile to make it work. I heard that it works, and I can break a lock- but I honestly never ever relied on it and it never really worked out for me.
The “gonna drop my tanks, dive like a pro and get the hell outta here” method works a lot better than those few chaffs. -
Again you need to chaff a aircraft / sam radar, not the missile itself. That’s pointless.
-
I did some tests and I was hardly ever able to break the lock of any incoming ARH missile. SARH missiles can be done by beaming, chaffing and working into the vertical (making your speed in the horizontal plane technically zero).
If you break the lock of the firing aircraft on a ARH shot AND chaff AND change direction, there is some chance for success if you do it right.
Pop some chaffs when you see the “M” thoughIf you chaff too early, it will re-aquire you. If you chaff too late, your signature is too big already. A good rule of thumb is 3-5 miles out on a ARH missile.
As AMRAAM said … Flares are made to defeate IR missile seekers. Chaffs are optimized to disturb fighter’s radar … NOT missile’s radar (not working on the same frequencies/parameters/resolution …) or very very unlikely.
Monli is gonna say that chaffs are ineffective against ARH … this is true. And correct.
-
Monli is gonna say that chaffs are ineffective against ARH … this is true. And correct.
I dont disagree with you but how can you be so sure? Just like to get some evidence
-
Just like to get some evidence
Join the Air Force of your country and ask your Intel officers if you want evidences (if they have those evidences). I won’t (and can’t) give you any.
-
Ok…
-
As AMRAAM said … Flares are made to defeate IR missile seekers. Chaffs are optimized to disturb fighter’s radar … NOT missile’s radar (not working on the same frequencies/parameters/resolution …) or very very unlikely.
Monli is gonna say that chaffs are ineffective against ARH … this is true. And correct.
The different frequency thing makes sense…
In my tests it looked like it can help to defeat the missile kinematically by “disturbing” the radar for a few seconds (or fractions of seconds). It will correct quick, but it seemed to guide straight for maybe a second or two which helped me completing the last ditch. But it never lost lock.
Last ditch means a sustained 9G turn at 650kts initial speed into the missile… Which is why it has the name “last ditch”- if you are out of possibilities, you choose that last maneuver.It’s like:
Chaff probability to defeat an ARH in active homing (together with last ditch): <1%
Chaff probability to defeat an ARH in the datalink phase by breaking the lock of the launching aircraft: ~5-10% if combined with the right maneuversDon’t know what’s in the code though, but learning from real life experiences from people who know brought me very far in BMS, so I’m gonna stick with that
In the RP5 manual, one can read about the possibilities of chaff. Based on that, you should chaff when the missile is maybe 2-5 miles out. It didn’t tell it would work though.
On ARH missiles, you can spare your chaffs and have the same result.
Using them before the missile enters final guidance is way more effective. -
As AMRAAM said … Flares are made to defeate IR missile seekers. Chaffs are optimized to disturb fighter’s radar … NOT missile’s radar (not working on the same frequencies/parameters/resolution …) or very very unlikely.
Monli is gonna say that chaffs are ineffective against ARH … this is true. And correct.
Different lengths of chaff cuts target different frequencies. Increasing chaff density has little effect above a certain point, benefiting a mix of chaff cuts per bundle.
Only thing stopping anyone from creating such a general use chaff packet is spotty (poor) intel on the victim radars.
@TobiasA - speed in the horizontal plane is irrelevant. The FCR display is mechanized on horizontal display, but the mechanics behind it are 3D and do care about the vertical. Relative speed to the ground on the other hand is very relevant to a doppler radar. On the other hand doppler radars are highly resistant to chaff already, due to chaff being not very aerodynamic.
Beaming and chaffing would be counterproductive. One attempts to hide in the (main) doppler notch, and the other would be increasing RCS (which if in the notch shouldnt achieve anything anyway).
Never going to be a consensus on how it -should- work in BMS though, too many elements that approach sensitive information territory.
-
@TobiasA - speed in the horizontal plane is irrelevant. The FCR display is mechanized on horizontal display, but the mechanics behind it are 3D and do care about the vertical. Relative speed to the ground on the other hand is very relevant to a doppler radar. On the other hand doppler radars are highly resistant to chaff already, due to chaff being not very aerodynamic.
Beaming and chaffing would be counterproductive. One attempts to hide in the (main) doppler notch, and the other would be increasing RCS (which if in the notch shouldnt achieve anything anyway).
Yes, but going into the vertical (pure vertical) will make your ground speed exactly zero. You can break lock a lot of the time when facing older SAM’s by going straight down.
I think i used the wrong words (I’m no native speaker unfortunately).In BMS, I have made good experiences with chaffing while entering the notch or beam. If you break the lock in that phase, the missile might go ballistic and even totally miss you.
You might reverse your notching or beaming too- if it is a cheap shot, it will fly in the exactly opposite direction.
Flying a plain beam maneuver and employing chaff while flying straight all the time will have little to no effect, indeed. Even if you break lock, it would not help you.Facing the AA-12 which has to be supported longer than the AMRAAM, you can achieve ballistic misses by employing a mix of chaff, notching or beaming and reversing the direction of notching or beaming.
Against the Su-27 with its good radar it is hard, but against the MiG-29 it can be done with ECM and a mix of the above.
You need to maneuver in that time when you break the lock. Chaff will only give you a second or two, if any at all.