Are all aspect missiles too deadly?

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Guys, I've been wondering...

 

Once one side does use all-aspect IR missiles, the skies are a true slaughterhouse. When used by the player, it is not rare to score 100% kills with the whole loadout. And one just goes to uber-ace status in a few missions, with incredible numbers of kills. 

 

My point is: when reading combat stories on ACIG.org and stuff, one does not see that much accuracy: missiles do missfire and so on. Of course, in order to counter frustration, the game is easier than real life. As is the A.I. not that smart. 

Still, going back to base with 8 kills seems... overkill. Don't you think?

 

I know these missiles are quite deadly, but aren't they more fragile than their in game description, i.e. more prone to failure?

[Snailman 517]

it depends on side... mod... if plane is modded... if the missile is also modded... many things.

 

- Countermeasures are poorly modeled and used..  especially by the AI.

- missiles have much stricter launch requirements in RL... we cannot model most of those.

- nobody has real picture on missile capabilities. All we have to rely on official data and combat reports to model a missile. That means propaganda/advertisement values and who knows how much altered combat reports. It is natural that no one wants to badmouth their own product or admit real losses.

- Due to the problems stated above,  modded equipment is modeled to be better and better in values with years passing - but the top limit is 100%. At the same time CM is always the same. The original SF2 game was done till the early 80s

- Absence of IRCM devices against IRM

 

on the other hand, and AI pilot almost always spots the incoming missile, even if IRM.. so surprise shots are very rare. That affects mostly Rear60 aspect tail chasing missiles, hence the big gap between those and other IRMs

[Sheriff 88]

I agree with comments above regarding sim vs real world accuracy but ,as with in-game  aircraft performance, they seem to be about right in comparison to contemporary in-game  systems.

 

They are designed to be VERY effective . When all aspect missiles were evaluated in ACEVAL/AIMVAL the findings drove the AIM-120 program to develop a launch and leave longer range missile. However, they still  have their limitations.

Firing at targets with high angle off and close in results in some missiles not being able to "square the corner" and they miss. And they are vulnerable to counter measures. It would be interesting to  see if  effectiveness of AIM 9s, Archers, Pythons , Aphids improves decoy response in later models . I think I'll look a data inis to see how the :CounterCountermeasure= and NoiseRejection= entries compare between various models .

 

My main complaint is AI launches CM as soon as I fire IRM as Snailman says above. Even when firing from low 6 o'clock with no other bandits around. In 4th & 5th gen fighters an array detecting missile launches is possible but on Mig21 and 23 (?)  I don't think so.

[macelena 1,070]

To me, ingame, they spoil much of the fun. I try to stay in a timeframe in wich missiles are effective yet not deadrays, Vietnam, Six Day and Yom Kippur being my favs for that matter, along with historical significance beyond the awesome, yet fictional scenarios of cold war gone hot.

[+EricJ 4,245]

Back then when I was still flying SF2 (I'm just a lurker now) I'd still miss with the 9X a few times so it's not a "death ray" so to speak.  Even an AIM-120D shot misses a Flogger or a Fishbed.  So I can;t say it's so much overmodeled but also pilot skill and the fact that it's easier makes it seem so to me anyway.

[Tzareff 6]

Well for me a maximum countermesure values from 20 to 65 for all missiles depending on their year of introduction works. And the angle and distance to target realy make

sense at this values.

 

I agree with Snailman that countermeasures are poorly modeled but I also think that the missile "lateral G capability" i.e. max turn rate (G) in weapon editor if they are equal are very rough modeled too. As far as I know in real life the missiles are realy capabale of turning with 47 G for example but only for the first few seconds of their flight after that their maneuverability decrease dramatically ... but ingame i dont see any signs of this. And for this reason I use slightly downgraded parameters in my weapon editor and it works.

[Snailman 517]

CM and ALSO  ECM works cumulatively... 

 

A missile has - for example - 50 CM resistance... it means it has 50% against a single piece of flare or a puff of chaff. Very little chance, since most planes drop CM in pairs (already 25%) and considering the number of flares chaff dumped out by AI planes (and scared humans ) it is next to nothing. But if you have a missile with 90 or 95% it will be an exponential increase in efficiency, not linear...

Why? umm... roleplaying "colleagues" out there. You know the difference between a single dice or a handful of them. If you roll D10 "dice" 10 times it produces a more average result up to 100, than if you could roll with a special D100 just once. You have to roll the CM resistance again and again till there are CM pieces in front of you. Calculate the final chance for 50% of 50% of 50% of 50%... or 90% of 90% of 90%

 

 

So, setting CM resistance to 20 means automatic failure against anything equipped with CM. So the minimum and maximum values 0-100 should be squeezed into the 60-95 interval or something similar, calculating with at least 2-3 rolls of CM resistance. At the moment I have no better idea....

 

The same happens with ECM. If you add several ECMs to a plane, chances add up. For example I have seen a modded aircraft (i think it was a B-52) with a dozen of ECMs in the data ini, each had about 60 or 80 jamming strength. 12x60 = 720 jamming strength. It can be seen with a radar over 800 scan strength or so.... hooooly cow.

And I was debugging my radar for two days and it still did not work... until I changed the target plane type.

[ace 1]

I Agree with macelena   missiles are far to effective, it would be much more fun to get some damage and limp home with a cranky aircraft like in IL2 rather than the current Dead when hit,  as it seems to be now? Shame

[Rexor 1]

Excuse me, Tzareff, Snailman, but what is the value of countermesure resistance ?

The value in "Cm Rejection", is it right ?

BTW : I have fun only if I perform a gun kill !
 

Edited March 3, 2014 by Rexor

[+Hans Topp 115]

I dont know if all aspect are too deadly but my flights say nooooooo...

Edited March 3, 2014 by Hans Topp

[Snailman 517]

Yes, CM resistance is it.

 

Hans in depends on target aircraft. If it has and CM and how it is installed. And also launch circumstances. All aspect can lock on from the front, but a bad angle can still cause it to lose track, or lured by a CM in the worst moment. In case of all aspect, mostly depends on CM resistance, and the number of CM res rolls the missile has to pass till the target. A long range IRM is far less effective with the same CM value.

 

What I learned, the the effectiveness depends on a lot of factors.

-First, reliability roll.

-Then lock on chance (same of above)

-Then the missile booster/sustainer values has to be adequate for the missile to be able reach the target.

---If it slows down in the terminal phase, it will be a lot more easily shaken off. (early AA-2 and Sidewinder)

---If it is too fast, the missile tracking rate or turn rate will be way too low for tracking. Basically the missile cannot scan fast enough, keep track of the target and still turn towards it.

-Tracking rate. it is something like how often the missile updates the target - if this is too slow,  between two scans, the target can get out of the seeker FOV and lost. If too fast, the missile is unshakeable, follows ever little maneuver you make. You can only shake it if it has low Turn G, or runs out of speed.

-Turn G similar to above. if target position between scans have changed, the missile is able turn with this value to correct. I found that this has less effect than track rate.

-Jam resistance (ECM)  well I have little knowledge on this, although some missiles can more easily lock the sun itself, or fly through the target aircraft

-CM resistance, as I said the most important - and problematic value. Repeatedly rolled for the multitude of CM packages inside the seeker FOV.
 

+the hit boxes of target 3D model. If faulty, the warhead will not explode as there is no collision calculated.

[FightingFulcrum 5]

I fly warsaw pact, and I can say at least with Russian stuff all aspect missiles are not overpowered, I still have to make sure I am firing in reasonable conditions or the missile will almost certainly miss, especially if its a later model F-4 or something that starts popping flares.

[Snailman 517]

I fly warsaw pact, and I can say at least with Russian stuff all aspect missiles are not overpowered, I still have to make sure I am firing in reasonable conditions or the missile will almost certainly miss, especially if its a later model F-4 or something that starts popping flares.

 

I'm working of corrections to these missiles, especially earlier ones. Some were completely useless (0% hit chance). Yes, especially it is about long range IRMs. Reason I told u why, long flight time, more chance for decoys. See the table in previous post.

If you use R-8/98, R-40, R-23/24 and especially R-27 series "long range" IRMs. These missiles use semi-active guidance in-real life, until their IR seekers get into range. The game does not support this method, so we had to give 30-60km seeker head ranges to these missiles which is of course not realistic.

 

Which missile, in particular you are using? which year, which plane?

[FightingFulcrum 5]

I fly all sorts of planes but mainly Soviet. My favorite and one I spend the most time in is the MiG-23. I've noticed the AA-2s are near useless, but the AA-8 is much better, and the all aspect AA-8 is a fine missile, but no super weapon thats for sure. I rarely use the long range IR missiles except I have just started experimenting with the R-24T and had a few kills, but I just found out about it being all aspect so I'm not too certain on that one.

I've noticed that some of the Russian semi-active missiles seem to need to be  improved. Paticularly the older ones like the ones carried on the SU-15TM. That is another plane I have had almost no luck with, and also there is a problem with its radar display, I had the same problem in WoE but fixed it, but I can't remember how, the radar works ok but displays incorrectly, objects are in the wrong spot.

I'm not sure if all the missiles I'm using are Thirdwires or part of some addon I have, I know the MiG-23 pack comes with addon missiles, should I be using those or the default thirdwire missiles for more realistic performance, although by realistic I don't mean western propaganda stats haha.

If you would like me to test out certain missiles I can for you, I have a lot of experience flying the MiG-23 too.

Oh yeah I just remembered story about AA-2 missile, I was flying MiG-23 mission in I think late 70s, I got caught up  against Phantoms 2 on like 6 and although me and my wingman got a few it ended up being about 3 on 1 for me, I called in backup from Red Crown and got it but I noticed these planes showed up with AA-2 missiles iirc, After the Phantoms were killed a few slow moving planes I cant remember that were on their way home from a ground attack mission got caught up in the middle of the AI floggers. The 2 of them flew around at like 140 kts while they each got about 3-4 IR missiles fired at them and 1-2 SAR missiles fired at them before they died EACH. Now I don't have that bad of luck with missiles personally so perhaps it has to do with the AI too, but you can't tell me that missiles fired from MiG-23 in the 70s are so bad it takes 4 or 5 shots just to down a plane moving at very slow speeds.

Edited March 4, 2014 by FightingFulcrum

[Snailman 517]

I fly all sorts of planes but mainly Soviet. My favorite and one I spend the most time in is the MiG-23. I've noticed the AA-2s are near useless, but the AA-8 is much better, and the all aspect AA-8 is a fine missile, but no super weapon thats for sure. I rarely use the long range IR missiles except I have just started experimenting with the R-24T and had a few kills, but I just found out about it being all aspect so I'm not too certain on that one.

 

I've noticed that some of the Russian semi-active missiles seem to need to be  improved. Paticularly the older ones like the ones carried on the SU-15TM. That is another plane I have had almost no luck with, and also there is a problem with its radar display, I had the same problem in WoE but fixed it, but I can't remember how, the radar works ok but displays incorrectly, objects are in the wrong spot.

 

I'm not sure if all the missiles I'm using are Thirdwires or part of some addon I have, I know the MiG-23 pack comes with addon missiles, should I be using those or the default thirdwire missiles for more realistic performance, although by realistic I don't mean western propaganda stats haha.

 

If you would like me to test out certain missiles I can for you, I have a lot of experience flying the MiG-23 too.

 

Oh yeah I just remembered story about AA-2 missile, I was flying MiG-23 mission in I think late 70s, I got caught up  against Phantoms 2 on like 6 and although me and my wingman got a few it ended up being about 3 on 1 for me, I called in backup from Red Crown and got it but I noticed these planes showed up with AA-2 missiles iirc, After the Phantoms were killed a few slow moving planes I cant remember that were on their way home from a ground attack mission got caught up in the middle of the AI floggers. The 2 of them flew around at like 140 kts while they each got about 3-4 IR missiles fired at them and 1-2 SAR missiles fired at them before they died EACH. Now I don't have that bad of luck with missiles personally so perhaps it has to do with the AI too, but you can't tell me that missiles fired from MiG-23 in the 70s are so bad it takes 4 or 5 shots just to down a plane moving at very slow speeds.

 

- AA-2 has been fixed (but don't expect miracles), AA-8 is the only missile still having stock values and perfect.

- AA-3 Anab series has been fixed also, for FLOGGER23's  updates on the Su-11/15 series. More fine tuning will follow (speed) but otherwise, quite good. They will get proper cockpit, so don't worry.

- AA-7 Apex are bad, I'm working on it. I had to translate some russian books first.

- AA-10 are so so, speeds and some guidance issues but usable.

- AA-11 are also OK, I'm adding a late version, but has to be done the way it would not be over-effective

- MiG-23/27 series are under work, MUCH improvement underway.

 

Yes, i could use help with testing, I am making a Red side weapon pack, with standardized stuff. There will be Air-Ground ones, too, so saddle up for mig-27 too)))

[Rexor 1]

Yes, I agree with you about the missiles effectiveness, Snailman.

 

With realistic settings, I usually avoid at least 90% of missiles.

 

One thing I have noticed is that the AI seems to me to deploy countermeasures well the first time you shoot a missile to them, but the second time often do nothing.

[Centurion-1 1,228]

RE: Soviet weapons, is there any concerted effort to make new 3d models too? Ravenclaw has spoiled us with his western weapons so would be nice with some 2014 level HD russian AAMs. I have collected some reference material in any case, might be able to help with a weapon or two too.

[Snailman 517]

RE: Soviet weapons, is there any concerted effort to make new 3d models too? Ravenclaw has spoiled us with his western weapons so would be nice with some 2014 level HD russian AAMs. I have collected some reference material in any case, might be able to help with a weapon or two too.

 

Certainly, I am doing several, but there's a little break, as I was in Ukraine and... distracted ( 

I have all possible russian books, that's not a prob.  I invite you to the Weapons topic right now...

[Snailman 517]

One thing I have noticed is that the AI seems to me to deploy countermeasures well the first time you shoot a missile to them, but the second time often do nothing.

 

The problem with the AI is that they always spot the launch. So there is almost no chance to ambush ... for example an F-105 or a Phantom with an AA-2. And for a double kill ... nothing. If I get close, like 1000meters, from where I  get good chances, they will spot me and break off. So not an easy job to fine tune...

[Rexor 1]

The problem with the AI is that they always spot the launch. So there is almost no chance to ambush ... for example an F-105 or a Phantom with an AA-2. And for a double kill ... nothing. If I get close, like 1000meters, from where I  get good chances, they will spot me and break off. So not an easy job to fine tune...

 

.... Uhm ..... however, it seems to me that the AI is not so good at missiles avoidance ........ 2/3, 3/4 of the times I got them ......... but yes, usually when they are pretty close.

 

Pity that SF2 in recent scenarios doesn't seem to be completely in step with the times, IMO, perhaps ................ something like the Missiles Approach System, probably present on most of the modern airplanes, there's no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Approach_Warning

 

BTW : Do you know if there is a limit at the bullet speed that the LCOSS (Lead Computing Optical Sight System) in SF2 can accept ?

(Because I tried to create a gun faster, arond 1500 m/s, but I'm not sure about the LCOSS setting).

Edited March 6, 2014 by Rexor

[macelena 1,070]

You could use rocket pods in vietnam, they wont spook the intercepted flight. Without any doubt, i use them for B-52s anytime. It is not like those are easy anyways

[Snailman 517]

B-52s are my nemesis... It's understandable that they are difficult to lock on, because of jammers and such. But in SF2 they have a lot of anomalies I can't understand...

 

IR missiles always hit the same engine. After the first hit, the plane will be still flying with a half wing missing, but further missiles still want to hit the missing part - and fly through.

Some missiles miss them altogether... unfortunately I forgot which ones, though. I had no time investigate on the spot.
Some B-52 (modded??) are invisible to radars and cannot be locked on at all.

They dump several tons of chaff and flares so there is no missile (including all kinds of SAMs too) which could hit them (only the late ones) due to the problem I wrote some posts earlier

 

If you want a good target aircraft, use Tu-16 badgers, Vautours, early F-4 Phantoms and A-4 - depending on the desired maneuverability

[JediMaster 451]

You can't judge whether missiles are modeled realistically by kill streaks in a sim. We don't worry as much about dying as a real pilot would. The environments are modeled far simpler (no worries about temperature or moisture or whether the ordies hooked it up right etc). The AI are never ordered to disengage, it's always "fight to the death!"

 

In real combat, you'd have two groups of dozens of planes meet and maybe 4 or 5 would get shot down. In a sim, you have two groups of 8 planes meet and it's a good bet all 8 on one side will drop and a large number on the other side will as well. Real combat is NEVER as lethal as it is in sims. AI planes just don't disengage from battle damage like they should.

 

There is an inherent unreality to sim combat that can't be removed. You'll always be better than the AI for the simple reason that we can get shot down 100 times without dying and learn from it. Real pilots die before they get to learn that, only a select few are good enough or lucky enough to survive to get good.

 

If all of us died or at least were permanently banned from ever flying again the first time we were shot down...none of us would be here!

[+Gepard 11,295]

In game the western missiles are overrated. Its nomal. Its an american game. From stock it is intended only to fly "blue" birds. To make it easier for weaker pilots the balance of weapon efficency is moved toward the blue missiles. No problem with it.

Then we have only 360°, 180° and 60° aspect angles for the seeker heads. In reality the all aspect seaker heads came much later. Even the AIM-9L had had a launch field rather in shape of a horseshoe than a ring. During Libanon War 1982 was nearly no head on shot with AIM-9L successfull. The missiles became deadly when the israelis used it for tail on shots. The Launch envelop was around 320°. A lock on of a head on target was only possible if the enemy used the afterburner. Otherwise the seaker head was unably to lock on.

This has changed in the late 80th.

[macelena 1,070]

Early Atolls being as bad as AIM-9Bs is right, but the main issue would be that every fighter gets to know about them, specially in Vietnam with the MiG-21 slash attacks. It is more of an AI flaw wich i doubt even TK could fix. Aircraft that get to know you shot a AAM when they shouldn´t, or be oblivious to you when you zero them with a new gun as bullets fly past them. I prefer to avoid this kind of situation by selecting different kind of missions