Possible active radar missile bug (very serious issue)
-
So what does the pilot say then? Just that its weak? Does he say what makes it weak in bms?
Cheers
-
First I don’t think he will ever answer.
Second I don’t think he is just one.
Third I think those kind of things r inside info that can never go public. like whom, how, data, stats etc.
Forcing and asking for those infos, first, is like hitting our head on the wall. Second becomes irritating to the ppl involved, sure they can just ignore us, sure they will, better will. -
Guys, if you will discubb about AIM-120 effectiveness why don’t you open a new topic? I opened this topic to discuss a bug.
-
Guys, if you will discubb about AIM-120 effectiveness why don’t you open a new topic? I opened this topic to discuss a bug.
And it has been addressed by Biker and other moderators.
What has NOT been addressed is the glaring range issues and lack of atmospheric benefits from higher-altitude launches.
-
Just to add an experience, I never defeated an AMRAAM or an AA-12 with chaffs, always and only by dragging it.
-
I read through first few pages here an jumped to here .
Didn’t we go through this about 1 or so ago with BMS devs ?That said, what you describe is what I always saw in older version . Once you set a missile up properly with active radar . the seeker refreshes itself so yes the chaff is working “but” it is able to reacquire a lock fast right after the last chaffs . I don’t remember the rate and I believe it is hardcoded .
With SARH you only need to break the lock once .
I would think what is needed would be how many sweep rates the active radar needs to reacquire a lock again .
I don’t have F4 stuff on this machine so I can’t give more info, as I am going by memory .
I know we left it alone in AF as we had to real time to change or RL data to change it .
-
I read through first few pages here an jumped to here .
Didn’t we go through this about 1 or so ago with BMS devs ?That said, what you describe is what I always saw in older version . Once you set a missile up properly with active radar . the seeker refreshes itself so yes the chaff is working “but” it is able to reacquire a lock fast right after the last chaffs . I don’t remember the rate and I believe it is hardcoded .
With SARH you only need to break the lock once .
In FF4 is the relock exist but you can break the lock again. The relock can happen if only you are so dumb that you do not make turns. Because of the big relative position change and the time for relock the capability is theoretical, missile is not able to perform again.
In BMS4 you cannot break the second lock and mostly not even the first lock. I uninstalled the FF4 but if you wish I reinstall again and I make some videos if you wish…
-
In FF4 is the relock exist but you can break the lock again. The relock can happen if only you are so dumb that you do not make turns. Because of the big relative position change and the time for relock the capability is theoretical, missile is not able to perform again.
In BMS4 you cannot break the second lock and mostly not even the first lock. I uninstalled the FF4 but if you wish I reinstall again and I make some videos if you wish…
In AF from what I remember you could not to spoof a active missile like 120 by chaff alone .
You could break by pushing seeker to its max . Now with debug running it did break it but only for split second .
I don’t know on FF, never had it installed .See if Sweep rate = this is sweep angle in radian per seconds
Does anything, slow it down .are active very fast ? -
With SARH you only need to break the lock once .
true - and it is a big handicap IMHO…some SARH missiles (most of them I guess, even modernized R-23 and R-24 IIRC) have lock after launch capability…so they should be able to re-lock I think - but all of them go balistic 2 sec after launch
these small bugs when summed up makes unrealistically huge difference between SARH and ARH missile efficiency
-
true - and it is a big handicap IMHO…some SARH missiles (most of them I guess, even modernized R-23 and R-24 IIRC) have lock after launch capability…so they should be able to re-lock I think - but all of them go balistic 2 sec after launch
these small bugs when summed up makes unrealistically huge difference between SARH and ARH missile efficiency
Yes, there could be a relock value and a timer, self-destruct/lose lock data. the thing with this kind of stuff it is so classified if you model it real well you need a lot of info or your just guessing . But some educated guesses might be ok .
-
See if Sweep rate = this is sweep angle in radian per seconds
Does anything, slow it down .are active very fast ?In DB all or almost all modelig are the same, I canged only the chaff chance to see the difference. The results are 100% clear.
-
So, is there any reason to dump chaff against active missiles in stock BMS ?
What about redflag 4.0? database and chaff resistance modifed ? or not ?
Anyone ??
Thanks.
-
Nothing, the code is borken.
-
Nothing, the code is borken.
Put some real data (120s chaff resistance and scan alghorythms) on the table before you use “borken”
-
@A.S:
Put some real data (120s chaff resistance and scan alghorythms) on the table before you use “borken”
Maybe, least in manufacturer propaganda…
Hard to belive that it’s 100% immune to chaff and jammers and kills always.
-haukka81
-
@A.S:
Put some real data (120s chaff resistance and scan alghorythms) on the table before you use “borken”
What real (?) data you need besides that if you set 1.0 or 0.99 or whatever chaff chance the ARH never, yes, NEVER miss the target if it is withing kinematical range….?
If you set the same chaff sensitivy for SAMs or AC radars all radar guided missiles lost the target after 1 or 2 chaff drop. SAM, SARH missile, whatever, only the ARH is problematic. The test results are 100% obvious and consistent. If you set the same chaff chance for ex in FF4 the ARH lost the target and do not regain unless you fly straight ahead and you are flying slow. The chance for relock is theoratical because during a real missile defeat attempt you fly in a very different way
In BMS4 even the missile lost the target the relock is 100% sure and never lost the target again. Yes, never. I performed about 100+ launches in different combinations with various aspect, speed and alt in AI vs AI, player vs AI and in player vs player cases. Chaff never worked. Yes, never. If I put SARH on AC the hit chance of missile was theoretical only the stupidity of the AI gave a sligth chance. I did not have to use jammer or doing hard turns. I simple dropped chaff and unless the distance was not very, very small - the old distance mulitplier seems to me still used - only dropping chaff was enough.
Sorry, but I’m a bit fed up such a skepticism. I’m too tired and too drunk currently. I’m not a noob in Falcon universe. I said what I said because of many reasons and test results and not because my hobby is not making flame posts…
It is a bit funny that FF Team also did not believed me first time when I found similar major bug in ARH missiles early alpha version of FF5.0. Only problem that test results was so obvious that they had to accept that I was right and fixed the problem. What worked in FF4 did not worked in FF5 alpha in 100% exactly the same cases.
I do not understand instead of asking why do not do the same tests what I did…?
-
@A.S:
Put some real data (120s chaff resistance and scan alghorythms) on the table before you use “borken”
I doubt that anybody have data becase these are top secret…
I’m also bored a bit with “make as real as possible” because the aspect is used in a very selective way. Mostly this aspect is used why is said why is not improved something and why only F-16C is important regardless it is also cannot be made 100% real but somehow quickly gained what anybody do not like holy weapons…
Regardless of this is one of the best simulator it is still a game either. Somehow this is forgotten… You have to consider the fun factor. With current weapon modeling values too many missiles mean to me a showstopper feautre. It is not fun to live in such a universe where even the late '80s missile are holy weapons…
-
Why so angry?
If you (we) want to improve things, than we need a basis to work from first. Just crying out loud, that things are broken will not help fixing it.
So, i recommoned researching (at best as it is possible of course) and construct a better reasoning. From there it can be developed or thought-through further.
What is the worst thing to do, is an opinion based “tweak” (seen in FF, where that leads).The fun-factor surely i don´t forget, but i do also consider the tactical presentation of an simulated environment (if that makes sense).
I don´t think, that you are noob or such, but i can´t take your case serious as it is no case yet (just observations and opinions).
In the words of the NSA director (out of context, but funny): “unless someone comes along, and shows how it can be done better, this is the best we have to work with for now”BTW: The chaffs work beautifully versus the emitter plattform and its already a “joke” to defeat missiles imo (have shown that in a previous post - breaking R-77 from the rails + chaff).
-
I’ve fired on targets within kinematic range and they managed to dodge them, so I don’t understand this 100% kill thing.
-
This post is deleted!