Possible active radar missile bug (very serious issue)
-
As far as the decoy effectiveness is concerned, and that’s all we’re talking about here remember, there has only ever been one code path for all ARH missiles. That code path reflects best understanding of slammer behavior; it does now, it did before. The difference compared to older versions is that the current one is less susceptible to chaff; this effect is more pronounced the more beam aspect is involved. In the older setup, missile seekers looking at targets near beam aspect would be significantly more susceptible to chaff. Now they aren’t as much.
So can you tell whats best time / tactic to use chaff if ARH missile is coming ?
Beam aspect is bit hard to undestand for my limited english
Thanks
-
So can you tell whats best time / tactic to use chaff if ARH missile is coming ?
Not really In practice, chaff doesn’t work well against slammers so it’s only a last ditch chance anyway so might as well pump some chaff but keep your expectations low.
Beam aspect is bit hard to undestand for my limited english
By target at beam aspect what I mean is looking towards the target from the nose of the missile, if you are looking at the side view of the target then it is at beam aspect…in other words, if the longitudinal center line of the aircraft is at right angles to the longitudinal center line of the missile then the target is at perfect beam aspect.
-
Wow this went even faster than I thought…
18 pages allready, closing fast to 30 and NO ONE tested the AIM54 to compare.Anyone actually read the last 5 pages? :rolleyes::D
Don’t worry guys. By the time we are at 50 pages I’ll be at home.
When we’re at 53 pages I tested it with other missiles than the AIM120. -
Boxer,
do you think that the best range to missle for chance to defeat with beam/chaff is still 4 miles to 8 miles?
-
Mathematically, yes.
-
-
Wow this went even faster than I thought…
18 pages allready, closing fast to 30 and NO ONE tested the AIM54 to compare.I also tested the AIM-54, AIM-120 and R-77. Results were the same.
-
Wow this went even faster than I thought…
18 pages allready, closing fast to 30 and NO ONE tested the AIM54 to compare.Anyone actually read the last 5 pages? :rolleyes::D
Don’t worry guys. By the time we are at 50 pages I’ll be at home.
When we’re at 53 pages I tested it with other missiles than the AIM120.the whole thread is 5 pages…
-
In default forum settings its 19 pages.
@molni
Roger. Then this thread better be closed -
In BMS4 regardless what you set ARHs are immune to chaff.
Nearly immune yes. This is quite correct and realistic.
-
Nearly immune yes. This is quite correct and realistic.
I strongly disagree.
- Because of gameplay aspects and also RL. Saying that a late '60s AIM-54A - because it was developed in late '60s - is immune to any EW activity is simply funny even for late '70 / early '80s of AIM-54C. Same case for early AIM-120s, R-77 and other missiles.
- They are not nearly immune they are immune because ARH code is buggy. I have shown how it looks in case when the code is working. In current BMS4 you cannot break the radar lock permanently. the missile relock you instantly. Period. Should I install AF to show how it works besides the video with FF4…? I have never checked OF but I can test also that Falcon variant…
Why is so hard to admire that the code is simply broken…? :roll:
If you set 0.99 chaff chance to SARH missiles they can be defeated 1-2 chaff. If you set the same for ARH regardless of distance - because of modifier which is explained in RP5 manual - they always hit you. Always. If you set 0.99 to IR missiles it is piece of cake defeat them. Translating into practical usage ARH are immune to chaff. Period. From my aspect this is insane…As long this code exist I cannot recommend to anybody to play with BMS4 in AMRAAM era because it is simply not fun playing and environment where holy and undefeatable weapons are exist. Yes, you can defeat them kinematically but a major modeling part is simply broken… This modeling issue is one of the major reason why I started to MOD Falcon.
-
I would recommend a serious research on how and how well “chaffs” work as countermeasures. I have an impression, that they are a little bit overrated as “wunder-waffe”.
Besides, too well working chaffs (simulated) can have an ugly effect on the BVR scenario too. -
They are very far from winder waffe in Falcon world. Against just semi advanecd radars and missiles (MiG-23 + R-23R) the chaff alone is way too few to be sure. Many times I have explained. In current DB literally there is not “middle” category. Weapons are very sensitve of literally instensitive to chaff/flare or EW countermeasure. There are only a very few exceptions…
-
Afaik, right now it doesn´t matter in what intervall or quantity one releases chaffs and flares. No difference on impact.
On the other side, 4.32 is 4 years old Molni… wait for 4.33. Rumors go, it will be better -
@A.S:
Afaik, right now it doesn´t matter in what intervall or quantity one releases chaffs and flares. No difference on impact.
Well … I will ask Amraam if he alows me to share his chaff seq for AIM-120 … but by using it, I was able to break a lock (no manœuvre … not working all the time of course and actualy rare.)
I strongly disagree.
Because of gameplay aspects and also RL. Saying that a late '60s AIM-54A - because it was developed in late '60s - is immune to any EW activity is simply funny even for late '70 / early '80s of AIM-54C. Same case for early AIM-120s, R-77 and other missiles.
Those AD are working with doppler treatement right … IRL, chaff have very poor or no effects on missile AHR AD.
You have your informations … I have mine
-
@A.S:
Afaik, right now it doesn´t matter in what intervall or quantity one releases chaffs and flares. No difference on impact.
It as a impact ;).
Deejay: it will not work on 4.32 for fox3. Issue as been confirmed long time ago ;).
But honestly, chaffing a fox3 is a non-sense. I never heard such tactics for this kind of missile because the missile will be able to reaquired the target as soon the coast time is finish. IRL, only one solution for fox3 shooter: turn & run. -
I never heard such tactics for this kind of missile because the missile will be able to reaquired the target as soon the coast time is finish.
… So I can tell you that chaff will have no effect (as decoy’s speed is decreasing almost instantaneously AHR (doppler) will reject it.)
-
But honestly, chaffing a fox3 is a non-sense. I never heard such tactics for this kind of missile because the missile will be able to reaquired the target as soon the coast time is finish. IRL, only one solution for fox3 shooter: turn & run
During AF at least one MiG-29 at least once beamed and defeated AIM-120 with combined chaff usage…
But honestly, chaffing a fox3 is a non-sense. I never heard such tactics for this kind of missile because the missile will be able to reaquired the target as soon the coast time is finish. IRL, only one solution for fox3 shooter: turn & run.
You miss the big picture. In complex tactical situation can happen that missiles does not come froom 11/1 direction and you can turn and beaming quickly while you dive into ground cultter even you are the edge of the NEZ. It happened me in FF many times…
… So I can tell you that chaff will have no effect (as decoy’s speed is decreasing almost instantaneously AHR (doppler) will reject it.)
Aham… If it was so easy can you explain why aircraft onboard radars and SARH missiles can be defeater with chaff…? You simply forget the effect of beaming in ground clutter… In the era of ARH AAMs and SAMs can you explain to me the existance of chaff on AC…?
-
Arf … I give one clues : relative speed missile/defender and ARH’s PRF (relative speed ambiguity).
I will certainly not explain everything Molni … I say this, then, do what you want with it.
Believe or believe not.
Do not forget that chaffs are not made for defeating missiles, but to disrupt radar acquisition, maybe, with luck, break the lock. But chaffs, just like flares, can be totaly ineffective if not released at the right time … Can even have a negative effect on defensive manoeuvres.
Can’t tell you more … More details would be rather confidential.
During AF at least one MiG-29 at least once beamed and defeated AIM-120 with combined chaff usage…
… Certainly … Poor or “immune” dosen’t mean ever never. The beam could have been enough … Or can also be against a defailant AD which would have missed anyway. Who knows.
But basically and in a rule of thumb … Chaff = not useful against ARH.
That said, nothing or anyone prevent you to drop some anyway. I do … With luck it will be the 0.X% of sucess!
-
Do not forget than chaffs are not made for defeating missiles, but to disrupt radar acquisition, maybe, with luck, break the lock.
That´s how i learnt it and that´s how i use it in Falcon, combined with displacements within the “radar gates” of the bandit in order to delay the bandits lock i.e - even back in AF days.
Sometimes, if i do break into ARHs (3-9 line) …i put few chaffs out anyways, but this is more for “cosmetic” purpose or a low probability countermeasure tbh.Versus SARHs the chaffs are more effective, exactly because of this reason (breaking the lock of emitter plattform and screwing up the guidance so to speak).
@Molni:
If “chaffs” would be so effective, imagine what would happen to an ARH, if the bandit would have a wingman. The missile would hit the wrong plane, because
a plane has much more RCS than stuipid “chaffs”. Maybe they are effective if the missile itself lost track earlier on, so the requiring become obscured, but they are for sure
not “strong” enough to “hard-break” the lock of the missile itself (ARH).