Is the Sparrow too powerful?

[Stratos 3,188]

I don't want to start a comparison or flaming war, but have been flying in BMS a lot and launching the AIM-7M Sparrow using the ADV F-16. BMS has the reputation of being the most realistic sim available at the moment, and the Sparrow behaves completely different in both sims. In SF is a killing machine achieving very high PK while in BMS is very hard to mantain proper lock (remember the Sparrow needs to mantain the lock during ALL the flight to the target as is not capable of relinking once the link is lost), I think SF simulates far better the flight characteristics of the missile, but lose when compared in the avionics department as I think our radar is too powerful as the enemies cannot break lock.

 

The Sparrow requires a hard lock so the enemy plane will know he's being locked, so it should try to broke the lock being with ECM when able or maneuvering, in SF the enemy tends to keep pressing until it gets a Sparrow on the face. Currently is very easy to mantain the lock all the way to the kill

Should I change parameters of the radars? or in the Sparrow itself? Or maybe is the enemy AI?

 

I'm talking about modern enemies (Mig-29, advanced Mig-23's...) no old Fishbeds. I'm using F-15C's and F/A-18C and the M version of the AIM-7. And flying over Iraq on ODS mod.

[Do335 382]

eh... I otoh think the sparrow in BMS is too weak. the issue is confounded by:

 

there is some kink resided in bms' radar locks, causing STT and TTS (two target SAM) to break lock very often;

once the lock is broken, the sparrow goes ballistic.

 

about the first, it directly comes from RL viper pilots, the real radars don't lose lock nearly as much taken into account obvious factors like bandit beaming, chaffs etc. about the second, if my sources are correct, the M and later versions can resume tracking if radar lock is temporarily lost. but i'd love to hear some definitive info on it.

 

for the sparrows in SF, i think it is more geared towards vietnam era, where missile mechanical failure and ground clutter is simulated, to the degree that it's the main reason for a miss; and the AI is dumb enough not to (significantly) beam or drag the msl, to reflect the early EW equipment and under developed msl fighting doctrines (or it's just Tk slacking off due to lack of money...), resulting in sparrows having a higher Pk.

 

just my 2c.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Do335

[Stratos 3,188]

I will try the DCS Sparrow armed F-15 and check what I can obtain.

 

So Do335, what you're saying is that we should aim to something between the two sims right?

[MigBuster 2,884]

Too many variables to compare really.

 

For a start no sim models modern weapon system performance accurately - the sub variants are rarely considered and even if you get the Aero correct there are just too many unknowns regarding the algorithms used and effect of countermeasures.

 

The initial AIM-7M came in about 1982/3? - I am not sure what iteration of the 7M was used in 1991 - which is pretty much the only performance indicators to go on. However the accounts I have tell us that (like the Skyflash) the seeker was the only improvement over earlier AIM-7s - because they were certainly not reliable and a lot of them even failed to leave the rail.

 

There is also evidence in those accounts that using clutter to beat the F-15C radar at the time was a simple formality.

 

The APG-68v5 is simulated in BMS AKAIK - but that is based on mid 90s information - however it is far more accurate than anything in SF - and should be a fair indicator of that era. Yes there have no doubt been software upgrades (v9 kits?) that have improved the performance since then against clutter as I have also seen mentioned.

 

TK did a few years ago make it easier for Jets to beat pulse Doppler radars in a more realistic manner (IMO) - however I suspect everybody complained - thus you now have gamey missiles.

 

Is there a source on the AIM-7M seeker performance - note even if it didnt go balistic doesnt mean that its still in a position to get to the target.

 

Its also likely BMS still just models a 90s AIM-7M - for want of better info - or the fact its not a primary USAF F-16C B50/52 consideration.

 

Now the FMS listed AIM-7M-F1/H SPARROW for Iraqs new F-16IQs this year - that to me looks like a possible upgrade - hope so for their sakes.

Edited September 4, 2014 by MigBuster

[Do335 382]

stratos, guess my point was, one is due to radar modeling and the other the AI. come to think of it falcon AF hits the sweet spot for sparrows. it's even got updated FMs for them and models missile mechanical and warhead failures. eeeh...

 

 

I will try the DCS Sparrow armed F-15 and check what I can obtain.

 

So Do335, what you're saying is that we should aim to something between the two sims right?

Edited September 4, 2014 by Do335

[+streakeagle 871]

SFP1 Sparrows were always a bit more effective than reality, but were still unreliable at launch and fairly easy to dodge. Fired within parameters against a co-operative AI target, I could hit at least 75% of the time with the AIM-7E2 and about 50% of the time with the AIM-7E.

 

The advertised AIM-7 performance in the 1960s based on ideal range tests was around 50%, but Vietnam performance averaged somewhere around 8 to 12%. But keep in mind, pilots decided to fire pairs to help overcome launch reliability issues and also frequently fired outside the interlocks, so the actual PK might be quite a bit higher -- maybe 20 or 30 %?

 

AIM-7Ms in combat conditions scored around 35% in "recent' years (think Desert Storm). They generally did not fire in pairs and waited to see if the first tracked before firing another missile.

 

SF2 Sparrows started out being less effective than SFP1 AIM-7s as flying low over terrain became a valid way to break a lock. Initially, AIM-7Fs were completely worthless as AI would always beam the firing aircraft and break the F-15's doppler lock. AI were detuned to use less than perfect beaming maneuvers. After the release of SF2NA, a lot of (new?) players complained about the ineffectiveness of missiles... too many were completely missing which frustrated many players. I liked the difficulty as it seemed more realistic. But in response to complaints Third Wire enhanced the effectiveness of missiles to make the game more fun. I can now hit just about every time if I shoot carefully against targets with no chaff or ECM. So, yes, in my opinion, Sparrows are too effective in the present patch version of SF2.

[PFunk 198]

I am inclined to agree with streakeagle and I would go so far as to say that the advanced missiles available in third-party weapons packs are essentially push-button killing machines.

 

I've actually 'nerfed' a lot of the A2A missiles and SAMs in the installs I have in order to let the AI have a fighting chance at surviving.  As it stands, the SF2 AI is not well-equipped to deal with 'silver bullets' like the AMRAAM.  So I've intentionally made them a little less effective.

 

If A2A missiles and SAMs were as lethal as the publications say they are, you'd be able to destroy every plane ever made twice over.

[Do335 382]

I consider anything to do with radars in SF unrealistic... Since TK did not implement radar antenna elevation, for a start.

 

It's either props or 50s jets for me. The dogfighting AI puts up a challenge... compared to the missile dodging one.

[PFunk 198]

SF2 AI can handle gun combat all day long.  It is ideally suited for it.  It's ideally suited for all eras of warfare, IMO.  It can do more than most other sims out there, which is why I play it.

 

I just intentionally made the missiles a little less effective.  Even the modern ones.

 

During the Ethiopian-Eritrean War, something like two dozen AA-10 missiles were fired in combat...for no hits.

[+streakeagle 871]

I don't know what 

 

I consider anything to do with radars in SF unrealistic... Since TK did not implement radar antenna elevation, for a start.

 

It's either props or 50s jets for me. The dogfighting AI puts up a challenge... compared to the missile dodging one.

I don't know what you mean by "antenna elevation". TK's radars most certainly care about their elevation angle and vertical beamwidth... they just don't stabilize relative to the horizon as real radars are normally used, instead, the search angle is always relative to the aircraft nose level line. So, to change your elevation, you merely pitch your nose up or down rather than twisting a knob on your stick. It is a rather elegant solution since he had no intention of providing an elevation knob for a "lite" sim. If it had been auto stabilized, there would have been no means to look up or down. Kind of like the gunsight depression knob: he wouldn't make it available to the player during the game, but you could select custom settings in the ini file for the various modes, which was more than good enough for those that wanted a particular depression angle. LOMAC/FC represents the next level up in complexity where the elevation angle can be adjusted in real time and is autostabilized to search the same angle relative to the ground despite aircraft pitch variations until the mechanical stops are reached.

[Do335 382]

Streak,

 

I get what you mean, kinda harsh to bash SF due to lack of a control knob. But it's more to do with me having flown the modern era to death, lest of joining the aviation industry I don't think there's anything more significant to learn out there so SF's liteness just doesn't resonate. But an early jet age where none of the shiny new toys have came to known, based on a immersive game engine, hey can't find one anywhere else atm.

 

I don't know what you mean by "antenna elevation". TK's radars most certainly care about their elevation angle and vertical beamwidth... they just don't stabilize relative to the horizon as real radars are normally used, instead, the search angle is always relative to the aircraft nose level line. So, to change your elevation, you merely pitch your nose up or down rather than twisting a knob on your stick. It is a rather elegant solution since he had no intention of providing an elevation knob for a "lite" sim. If it had been auto stabilized, there would have been no means to look up or down. Kind of like the gunsight depression knob: he wouldn't make it available to the player during the game, but you could select custom settings in the ini file for the various modes, which was more than good enough for those that wanted a particular depression angle. LOMAC/FC represents the next level up in complexity where the elevation angle can be adjusted in real time and is autostabilized to search the same angle relative to the ground despite aircraft pitch variations until the mechanical stops are reached.

 

[+streakeagle 871]

Aside from a clickable cockpit with more detailed radar operation, SF2 captures everything up to the F-15A exceptionally well. No other sim will let you fly anything from the Wright Flyer to the F-14/F-15/F-16 in a comprehensive combat environment. Until aircraft start having search radars with displays and knobs, SF2 isn't really lite. Very little has changed between me flying F-86 vs MiG-15 dogfights in SF2 KAW mod and DCS other than I have the option to do a full cold start and can break my engine. The flight models are different. I presume Belsimtek's model to be better, but haven't done any studies of my own to prove it one way or the other. The transonic region matters a lot with jets, and SF2 doesn't normally handle that well unless a very high resolution FM data ini is created and populated with good data. I would like to see a current or past F-86 pilot's opinion of the DCS F-86. P-51D pilots love the DCS P-51D, very few complaints and lots of complements of how well it mimics the things they experience at the edge of the envelope while performing air shows. I hope the F-86 is just as detailed/accurate.

[Do335 382]

^ yep I've checked out DCS. Would be nice to get some MP in. But it still got the old "empty" feeling to me... dunno.

 

About SF, I guess we have different definitions of "lite". But reason I like it is it's got atmo... campaign is (semi) dynamic, quite well done with all the chatters and whatnot. Throw in some challenging AI you got a good game. Pits, avionics, FM, Multiplayer.... many other sims do 'em a lot better like DCS, falcon, jane's. Depends on what one prefers i guess.

 

might move in on the DCS Sabre after they fixed the Mig-15 FM anyway. will see...

[turkeydriver 4]

Before you call one too effective and the other weak, remember what the AIM-7 was designed for- that being head-on engagements and as long as beaming and ECM aren't employed- it should do very well outside of internal missile failure or failure during launch on the aircraft side.  I've been playing Falcon since falcon3, and the Sparrow in BMS just isn't very playable ATM due to how the weapon and radar act in game.  It has HOJ, and it should beam ride like crazy during non- maneuvering head on shots.  It doesn't at all.  The SF series is more of a game but simulates some aspects much better than BMS.   Beaming and ECM work very well against the AIM-7 and AIM-54A.  However, missile failure isn't modeled in either game so you just cannot compare it to real life, however the SF series models guidance failure and the AIM-54 seems to fail more than the AIM-7 in this regard.  AIM-7s did fail on the rail and drop without motor ignition during Desert Storm, but they've also accidently engaged and destroyed a high sceep Mercedes car mistaken for a low flying helicopter and an American Destroyer in Vietnam, as well as AN-2 Colt bi-planes in Vietnam( canvas covered difficult radar target).  Just keep that in mind. 

[macelena 1,070]

Also take into account, we´ve got much more practice and situational awareness and much less stress and quirks in the game than real pilots would have got in real life. See how newbies keep posting for help because they can´t get to hit anything. Some of us have been here for twelve years, i´ve been seven. After thousands of Sparrow kills, and misses, you get to know how to do it pretty well...ingame. 

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Also take into account, we´ve got much more practice and situational awareness and much less stress and quirks in the game than real pilots would have got in real life. See how newbies keep posting for help because they can´t get to hit anything. Some of us have been here for twelve years, i´ve been seven. After thousands of Sparrow kills, and misses, you get to know how to do it pretty well...ingame. 

Very good points.

Who, here, lose his nerve in combat?

 

And we do not risk, well, to die. So target fixation it is, disregard risks and SAMs and just lock that sparrow!