AA10A SARH hitting and destrouing me after launching aircraft destroyed
-
Whitepony …my question (if you missed it) is actually : " is there a true “communication” between plane-radar and semi-active missiles ??"
-
I am not sure need to test it out……
-
Let me test this out and gather some ACMI
-
@whitepony99:
Nope its a radar seeker for the AA-10A/C and an IR for the AA-10B/D
let me try again. some of the AA-10’s in F4 had both SARH and IR seekers.
iirc the aa-10a/b had both ir and sarh. the aa-10c was just sarhthe aa-10a was the weapon on choice in human/mig-21 vs human-16 because it worked like a ARH without the
-
In real life the AA10A/C are SARH and the AA10B/D are radar and IR.
It is not possible to model the radar to IR missiles due to code limitations. This is why the Mica IR has ridiculous gimbals and FOV in order to track anything in its engagement range it needs a modified seeker with added range and gimbals
The AA10D however does not use this seeker which makes it highly ineffective at any range. Try firing the AA10D at something maneuvering while maintaining your lock, your missile will miss
Completely off topic but needed to explain it
-
@whitepony99:
In real life the AA10A/C are SARH and the AA10B/D are radar and IR.
It is not possible to model the radar to IR missiles due to code limitations. This is why the Mica IR has ridiculous gimbals and FOV in order to track anything in its engagement range it needs a modified seeker with added range and gimbals
The MICA IR does not have any ridiculous gimbals as you say: the SAGEM (the seeker manufacturer) announced gimbals are +/- 60°.
Furthermore the AA-10B (R-27T) and AA-10D (R-27ET) are not “radar and IR”, they are pure IR. They furthermore lack inertial and datalink guidance, unlike the MICA IR (talking about RL here).
-
let me try again. some of the AA-10’s in F4 had both SARH and IR seekers.
iirc the aa-10a/b had both ir and sarh. the aa-10c was just sarhthe aa-10a was the weapon on choice in human/mig-21 vs human-16 because it worked like a ARH without the
Hi caper
Not so.
The AA-10a/c are both SARH only. Their seaker head is a receiver and does not radiate, relies apon “illumination” from the aircrafts radar.The AA-10b/d have only a IR seaker head and receive no mid course updates from the firing airframes, this is easily tested.
-
there maybe as an old “quick threat reference.pdf” bundled in bms\doc\ that states deffer
-
Hi caper
The AA-10a/c are both SARH only. Their seaker head is a receiver and does not radiate, relies apon “illumination” from the aircrafts radar.
The AA-10b/d have only a IR seaker head and receive no mid course updates from the firing airframes, this is easily tested.
Correct, that´s how the real concept, with the addition, that the AA-10B/D (R-27T and R-27ET) can be linked (“slaved” in F4 terms) to the radar AND/OR the EOS (electro optical system) initially prior to launch.
In other words the Su-27 ie can lock you up and fire at you without ANY RWR threat warnings. -
@A.S:
Correct, that´s how the real concept, with the addition, that the AA-10B/D (R-27T and R-27ET) can be linked (“slaved” in F4 terms) to the radar AND/OR the EOS (electro optical system) initially prior to launch.
In other words the Su-27 ie can lock you up and fire at you without ANY RWR threat warnings.Correct but we are only talking Falcon/BMS here so I didn’t want to complicate the point I was making by adding more details then relevant.
-
AA-10, not SA-10.
Oh sorry. My bad, but still, worth the question of the distance from after TO.
-
Just something that got me wondering. IIRC, R-27 series have HOJ capability too. Although their PK is not really stellar with HOJ alone, I wonder would it enable them to keep (trying to) tracking a jamming target even after emitting radar is out of commission. (on second thought though, their HOJ capability may be nothing other than emitting radar’s ability to lock on jamming source which would quickly give “negative” as an answer to my query :))
-
great response dude and so helpful. Thank you.
Anyone else ever experience being downed by AA10A in similar circumstances?
Yes. The effect of damage on AI controlled AC is far from perfect.
DB says that the AA-10A/C seeker uses a different seeker type then a traditional SARH this is why you have this issue.
Where……???
If so go into the AA-10A WCD file and look at the seeker type, let me know what your DB says mine says 117.
I was told at one time that they gave the SARH A2A missiles seekers so they werent as easily spoofed
Only problem that dat file determines the main type of seeker which is SARH. So even you add a radar for SARH missile likely it is simply not used the data of the radar of the launch platfrom determines the resistance against chaff, ECM and other things.
It is not possible to model the radar to IR missiles due to code limitations. This is why the Mica IR has ridiculous gimbals and FOV in order to track anything in its engagement range it needs a modified seeker with added range and gimbals
And this is why has insane IR seeker range because LoaL + MCG cannot be simulated therefore this was the only way to model the BVR capability of an IR missile. This makes a holy weapon the MICA IR…
there maybe as an old “quick threat reference.pdf” bundled in bms\doc\ that states deffer
Never was accurate or usable.
-
Don’t know if it is linked to this but in our squadron, we’ve had a few instances where we were shot down without getting a spike, and ACMI later revealed it was in fact an AA10A/C shot (from AI, if that would matter).
-
The RWR code is not perfect. In some cases you get noise warning by RWR but your RWR is not lable is displayed and opposite case can happen, even the missile tracking launch warning disappers and only search is visbile. These cases are very, vary rare. During my 6 years of modding I have seen only about a dozen.
I’m 100% sure that SARH missiles chaff resistance are not defined by radar 117 because when I presented the buggy code the SARH missile was the exampel that only ARHs are affected. Just increase the chaff chance of radar and check the result.
-
maybe the missile was in MPRF state when the a/c was shot down. Happens with amraam too.
-
maybe the missile was in MPRF state when the a/c was shot down. Happens with amraam too.
SARH means that to impact, missile need a hard lock ALL THE WAY to the target… HPRF/MPRF/Pitbull/Husky doesnt exist for them, only for ACTIVE RADAR missiles such as AA12 Adder and AIM120.
On topic: although this issue is surprising (I think I had it too, Mig lost lock then BAM), this needs to be repeated, IMO.
Based on minimum approach range or max speed for AMRAAM & AA10, is there a way to estimate a distance where if you shoot Fox 3, you will hit the mig before AA10 impact ? Additionnaly, a range where the mig will be fully down (exploded and all) before AA10 impact ?
-
I3crusader - Yes. Equip yourself with the Phoenix missile onboard a very happy F-14, one of a select few aircraft with long range missiles. This should give you the distance you want, which is greater than the AMRAAM 120. Just hope they don’t see you lock them up.
Will this option work in the F-18C? NO. Not unless you re-write the files associated with it so it can carry that heavy AIM-54.
-Babite -
Not what I meant. I meant shooting A120 at a certain distance, so that it impacts after Mig29 shoots its AA10. Just using a Phoenix wouldnt bring anything.
I can bring a TGP, shoot when I see him launch, and hope my missile kill him before it hits me, while turning & burning. That would work.
One issue : I am guessing (might be wrong) if the mig just drop lock without dying, missile wont impact. The issue is propably with the mig dying while hes locked. With an A120, he will turn and drop lock before dying. Maybe MICA IR will give me the range I want ?
-
in F4AF it was known that the AIM-120 has longer legs than the red SARH missiles and one way to defend against the SARH was to kill the launch a/c before the missile hit you. However, the AA-10A would continue to track without RWR detection after the launch a/c was destroyed. So, against the AA-10A, after firing the -120 you still wanted to defend against the inbound with crank, beam, and/or drag tactics.
It kind of lame to think that a r/l pilot is going to shoot and not defend because he has so much pk confidence in his -120 missile.
I guess it was a dirty way simulating the Russian’s advance IR optic without writing a bunch of code. I don’t think there was much info on the system until the Germans acquired the Mig-29s after the Berlin wall fail anyway.