AIM-7M sparrow & the RWR
-
Chaff is a lot more complex a topic than a simple percentage chance to decoy a missile anyway… if it should be fixed, then it should be made to work correctly rather than some arcade percent chance system that rewards unrealistic employment.
You did not get it. The chaff does not work in BMS4. You can argue the value but that is another issues. If you wish to make immune to ARH, fine edit the DB and set low value, but currently the bug prevent to set anything. I have also explained this…
-
no, I get it - but I instead maintain that a percentage chance is not the correct implementation.
yes, the old implementation is bugged. No, I dont think making it work by fixing the bug is the solution.
@A.S:
But even in FF or AF …was is correct ?
It worked.
See, this here. You say I dont get it, but AS put it right out there what I am trying to say. You do not get it…
-
I beg to ask how effective do you think chaff is going to be against a Doppler radar, its not the 60s anymore.
-
well the AIM-120 uses a monopulse radar with doppler filter… doesnt make chaff useless though.
does mean its gonna make the radar less effective though.
rather than fixing this to make it replicate arcade behavior from a decade ago, it would be better to work on an overhaul of the countermeasures systems like chaff, flares, jamming…
-
The code is out there on the web, fix the chaff-radar part and send it to the developers.
Who knows, it could be working? -
well the AIM-120 uses a monopulse radar with doppler filter… doesnt make chaff useless though.
does mean its gonna make the radar less effective though.
well still a Doppler Radar, all returns go through a filter of one sort or another. No filter, its all white noise. Its called processing.
-
right, but it being a doppler radar is not some arcane technology… we had them in the sixties, and they still operate on exactly the same principles as they did back then.
Interestingly enough monopulse radars are naturally capable of home on jam against noise jammers, due to the principles of their operation.
-
True but irrelevant information.
The subject is or was the effectiveness of Airborne Radar subsystems to effectively filter out the returns produced by chaff deployed against inbound medium rang missiles, weather SARH or ARM, from a launch platform not too far away.Its not only the improvements in transmitting and receiving of those EMF patterns but also the processing power now available. (Valve based systems with discreet crude two or three junction solid state logic/control circuits etc. compared to the last few decades Integrated tech with power requirements divided by 10s or even 100s and processing power increased by hundreds of thousands.)
How long do you think a box of deployed chaff consisting of aluminium coated glass fibres with cross sections in the millimetre range to maintain a velocity comparable to the dispensing Airframe.
I could almost imagine a “Home on Chaff” function that will bring that stick right up your tailpipe.
-
Yes, chaff functions best with beam aspect against monopulse radars. Yes, chaff loses velocity almost immediately due to its surface area and very low weight. No, its not completely useless. Yes, the sim could use improvement in this area. No, I don’t think just fixing the bug as it exists is a great idea.
There, less “irrelevant” information
-
You are correct
-
Sometimes i wonder why airforces and armies install chaff and flares in planes (even f-22) because here in forum PC pilots know so much better that it’s not effective :rolleyes: Zzzz :rolleyes:
-
-
Sometimes i wonder why airforces and armies install chaff and flares in planes (even f-22) because here in forum PC pilots know so much better that it’s not effective :rolleyes: Zzzz :rolleyes:
Almost totally (or even totally) ineffective on latest missile generation CCM equipped (AA-12, AIM120, MICA, METEOR, SA-18/24) … But not on old generation type like SA-7, AA-2 … etc … which are still widely used all arround the world and especially on current theaters of deployment (Syria, Iraq, Libya …)
And there are not only PC pilots here … some ppl here have flirted with the Syrian boundary the last week.
-
Sometimes i wonder why airforces and armies install chaff and flares in planes (even f-22) because here in forum PC pilots know so much better that it’s not effective :rolleyes: Zzzz :rolleyes:
Spoken like a true PC pilot Love the smiles and pic it really lifts the standard around here.
And as DJ pointed out ……why bother…you missed the point, and yes this is a forum for PC pilots & I thought we were allowed to debate or even display our ignorance without the fear of being exposed as Medical Practitioners.
Oh the Shame.
-
What is "true pc pilot " ? You don’t like smilies huh …
-
I have explained, I opened a thread about it. This is bug, so the how should be part is very eary. Chaff worked in FF and AF and as I can remember even in OF. The bug should be fixed, that is all.
Molni, I just checked the code, and AMRAAMs do have a function that is testing chaff, maybe the chances aren’t so great but there is a test going on. Did you tried to play with the radar data of the missile’s seeker? because that is where the chances is taken from.
And BTW, even you for some reason you can’t get it to work on AMRAAMs by playing with the chances, it’s not that bad… you can see it as a “feature” to make AMRAAMs VERY effective against chaff, which is apparently not far from the truth.
-
I have posted comparsion video about AMRAAM with FF4 vs BMS4 1 year ago…
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/wqgn4814joucf/ARH_testIt was 100% evident that code in BMS4 is broken. Why is so hard to believe and see the truth…? It is soooooo funny that just before FF5 release I found the same bug in FF5, it was also hard to convince with similar test video the devs that something was buggy in the code… The history repeats itself…
In 100% same cases in FF chaff works and in BMS4 never… Of course you can aruge the chaff chance value but as long as the chaff chance value is simply ignore you cannot set anything different. ARHs are immune to chaff which is from my aspect means ARH BVR combat is broken BMS4 universe. Period. As long is this ture I never can accept campaigns where ARH missiles are widely used.
So not offense but you try to defend the very serious bug in BMS4 with… Sorry, I cannot find and PC word… So if you wish to defend the holyness of ARH you can do it only in case the low chaff chance provides the holy status and not a bug…
-
Sounds good too me
PS: for those who didn’t pick up on the irony.
It is hard to find a word for what I wanted to say, its like when your wife tries on a new dress and then ask you “does my bum look big in this”
Your screwed either way.
-
So Monly … It is not by yealling every days that it will change. Maybe it is time for you to consider that this is a choice on our side.
ATM we are not able to find the glitch in the code … So we can’t “fix it” (if something is to be fixed)
Maybe we will find it … Maybe not.
End of the story.
Unhappy? … Revert to FF which is bug free.
-
I don’t understand Molni why you continue to think that the Amraam is so weak versus chaffs?? Do you have access to real documentation? Because if not, FreeFalcon is a crap of sh@t and not a reference point to compare anything.
And believe me, the -120 C5 / C7 has minimal changes to be decoyed by chaffs in real… D has 0.