AAM accuracy question

[bladesinger79]

I should know this, but when US AAMs are about 1-to-3 or 1-to-4 in accuracy, gets me a bit peeved sometimes.

QUESTION: when firing missiles at enemy aircraft, does keeping the target in your arch after shooting increases your hit chances or are they truly fire-and-forget? I don't enjoy getting into a head-to-head missile exchange when I have 20 F15's vs 200+ enemy aircraft. I'm certain the enemy has jammers, chaff, and *ahem* skill...but I've seen too many misses.

[stww2]

Depends on the missile...with SARH missiles the firing unit will have to maintain a radar lock on the target until the missile hits. With many ARH missiles the firing unit will maintain a datalink with the missile and provide it with course corrections, in which case maintaining a radar detection will be useful in guiding the missile to a point where its own onboard seeker can actually detect and home in on the target. As far as CMO game mechanics are concerned, I don't believe having the firing unit maintain a radar lock will increase the actual pH chance in the weapon endgame calculations, but in many cases it can help ensure that the missile intercepts the target at all in order to trigger the weapon endgame calculations.

As far as increasing the pH chances of AAMs, your best bet is probably going to be to tweak your aircrafts' WRA to fire at closer ranges (this is the one variable in the weapon endgame calcs that you can actually influence). With the new missile flight model in the "Tiny" beta there may be some other things you can do as well, such as firing from higher altitudes or at faster speeds so the missile has more initial energy, but I haven't tested that. I'd be curious to see if anyone has.

[CHM]

I should know this, but when US AAMs are about 1-to-3 or 1-to-4 in accuracy, gets me a bit peeved sometimes.

QUESTION: when firing missiles at enemy aircraft, does keeping the target in your arch after shooting increases your hit chances or are they truly fire-and-forget? I don't enjoy getting into a head-to-head missile exchange when I have 20 F15's vs 200+ enemy aircraft. I'm certain the enemy has jammers, chaff, and *ahem* skill...but I've seen too many misses.

Get close, get behind, if possible. Missiles pH drops over distance, and targets have a greater chance of outrunning your shots.

[thewood1]

With new formation tools you can also control the approach your fighters take by separating them with a saved formation.

[BrianinMinnie]

Arm your F15's with a XL loadout of JATM, set to 80% WRA, it will make your day!

[mustang191]

What Pk is trying to simulate is airframe age. Missiles work all the time if they're new. In desert storm they refurbished the sidewinders and the aim 7p was in 1987. In Vietnam they built the sparrows in the 50s and they didn't work.

Pk is really a crude way of representing aging of equipment, if you are basing it on test results those just depend on the age.

The Nesher got all the kills in 73 as it was a new airframe. In 1965 Vietnam got migs and its kill ratio declined as navy got new planes. All the overwhelming victories were against old airframes. A new mig 21 killed a f 16.

Instead of Pk what you're really trying to measure is airframe life, a missile or plane 5-10 years old is a clunker but video games don't mention that, as a result they simplify it to accuracy values. In reality if the game is trying to simulate factory fresh equipment the Pk should be very high for everyone.

[BobTank63]

What Pk is trying to simulate is airframe age. Missiles work all the time if they're new. In desert storm they refurbished the sidewinders and the aim 7p was in 1987. In Vietnam they built the sparrows in the 50s and they didn't work.

Pk is really a crude way of representing aging of equipment, if you are basing it on test results those just depend on the age.

The Nesher got all the kills in 73 as it was a new airframe. In 1965 Vietnam got migs and its kill ratio declined as navy got new planes. All the overwhelming victories were against old airframes. A new mig 21 killed a f 16.

Instead of Pk what you're really trying to measure is airframe life, a missile or plane 5-10 years old is a clunker but video games don't mention that, as a result they simplify it to accuracy values. In reality if the game is trying to simulate factory fresh equipment the Pk should be very high for everyone.

Guys this is the troll. Ignore him.

[mustang191]

What Pk is trying to simulate is airframe age. Missiles work all the time if they're new. In desert storm they refurbished the sidewinders and the aim 7p was in 1987. In Vietnam they built the sparrows in the 50s and they didn't work.

Pk is really a crude way of representing aging of equipment, if you are basing it on test results those just depend on the age.

The Nesher got all the kills in 73 as it was a new airframe. In 1965 Vietnam got migs and its kill ratio declined as navy got new planes. All the overwhelming victories were against old airframes. A new mig 21 killed a f 16.

Instead of Pk what you're really trying to measure is airframe life, a missile or plane 5-10 years old is a clunker but video games don't mention that, as a result they simplify it to accuracy values. In reality if the game is trying to simulate factory fresh equipment the Pk should be very high for everyone.

Guys this is the troll. Ignore him.

I just fixed your entire game and you complained.

[stww2]

Just to clarify what goes into pH calculations for AAM's for anyone who happens to stumble across this thread genuinely curious about the concept:

00:36:54 - Weapon: AIM-7P Sparrow III #2821 is attacking 1036 Sqd. #1 (Su-22M-2K Fitter H) with a base PH of 85%. PH adjusted for distance: 70%. 1036 Sqd. #1 has nominal agility: 2.5, adjusted for altitude: 1.2. Agility adjusted for proficiency (Novice): 0.36. Aircraft has a weight fraction of 0.22 - Agility adjusted to 0.31. High-deflection impact (no effect on agility). Final agility modifier: -3%. Final PH: 67%. Result: 17 - HIT

Above is an example weapon endgame calculation. Factors considered include:
-the base PH of the missile (found in the missile's database entry)
-the distance between location of the missile when it was fired and when it arrived at the target (this is why I mentioned that firing at a closer range is one of the few things you can easily do as a player to increase AAM PH chances)
-the agility of the target (there's a base value, probably in the DB, and then the actual agility used in the calc is affected by the variables below)
-the altitude of the target (do lower altitudes lead to higher agility? I should know this but I don't remember of the top of my head. If someone knows please comment)
-the proficiency of the target
-the weight of the target (a heavier loadout means less agility)
-the angle of impact (I think a side-on impact is worse? Not really something you can control as the firing side anyway)

So the final PH value comes out to Base PH-range adjustment-agility adjustment. Then it gets run through a RNG and if the result is below the final PH it's a hit; if above a miss.

(Note that this is all based on the current stable game state as of 27 May 2022. I haven't checked to see if the missile kinematic changes in the "Tiny" public beta change this process)

[mustang191]

Just to clarify what goes into pH calculations for AAM's for anyone who happens to stumble across this thread genuinely curious about the concept:

00:36:54 - Weapon: AIM-7P Sparrow III #2821 is attacking 1036 Sqd. #1 (Su-22M-2K Fitter H) with a base PH of 85%. PH adjusted for distance: 70%. 1036 Sqd. #1 has nominal agility: 2.5, adjusted for altitude: 1.2. Agility adjusted for proficiency (Novice): 0.36. Aircraft has a weight fraction of 0.22 - Agility adjusted to 0.31. High-deflection impact (no effect on agility). Final agility modifier: -3%. Final PH: 67%. Result: 17 - HIT

Above is an example weapon endgame calculation. Factors considered include:
-the base PH of the missile (found in the missile's database entry)
-the distance between location of the missile when it was fired and when it arrived at the target (this is why I mentioned that firing at a closer range is one of the few things you can easily do as a player to increase AAM PH chances)
-the agility of the target (there's a base value, probably in the DB, and then the actual agility used in the calc is affected by the variables below)
-the altitude of the target (do lower altitudes lead to higher agility? I should know this but I don't remember of the top of my head. If someone knows please comment)
-the proficiency of the target
-the weight of the target (a heavier loadout means less agility)
-the angle of impact (I think a side-on impact is worse? Not really something you can control as the firing side anyway)

So the final PH value comes out to Base PH-range adjustment-agility adjustment. Then it gets run through a RNG and if the result is below the final PH it's a hit; if above a miss.

(Note that this is all based on the current stable game state as of 27 May 2022. I haven't checked to see if the missile kinematic changes in the "Tiny" public beta change this process)

It would depend entirely on the age of the missile, the same missile model at different times is obviously going to give different results.

A brand new fitter could outmaneuver the missile flat out. Given perfect skill and maintenance the missile would never win. Hits occur because of old airframes and mistakes.

A su 22 has a comparable turn rate to a phantom, based on wing loading. Thats around 30 degrees a second. A AMRAAM turns 17 and a sparrow probably less. Even if the missile is twice as fast it can't out turn the fitter. Even a fitter can evade a slow amraam, rather easily, a amraam has a lower turn rate than a b-52.

The reason missiles hit is the plane doesn't evade or just is a old airframe. It's easy to see a new airplane will easily evade any missile, of course this will get troll replies from bob but it's trivial math I can cite easily.

The real math is more like

17 degrees/second amraam turn rate (less for sparrow)
Mach 4 missile
Mach .7 fitter
4/.7= the missile is 6x faster
17*6= 102 degrees per second turn rate needed to evade.

If the missile slows to under mach 1 then it will be less than the 30 degrees per second needed. The sparrow reaches mach 2.5 normally while the amraam would slow down in a lot of cases (eg a 20% course correction losses a fifth of the speed, and a similar amount of energy to correct the error). So a fitter could rather easily defeat a sparrow as the missile has a lower turn rate than a b-52.

We can also calculate the missile turn rate from G. The maximum G of a amraam is around 50g. For a 4 meter missile with 2 meter radius that's a angular momentum calculation. Gravity is 10m/s or 1g is 100 watts. That's 5kw for 50g at 1 meter or 10kw at 2 meters. For a kilogram mass that's 100 m/s, or 25 m/s (2 meters squared divided). That's a tenth of a second to turn 90 degrees or 900 degrees per second.

If the missile is going 1000 m/s then the energy needed is 100 times faster than 10m/s, so we end up with a nine degrees per second turn rate for the amraam. In reality the missile goes slower for most of its flight which gives the higher turn rate.

As for the 50g number, it comes from energy density. If the missile weighs a few hundred kg and goes a few mach the energy density of fuel limits acceleration to that range.

[thewood1]

I'll repeat this post here. We're really trying to help you overcome your challenges. You're in our prayers.

I know reading is really hard for you, but give this a try...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ietnam_War

If its too hard to read, just slow down and sound out the words. My seven year old was able to read above grade level by doing that. I know you can do it. We're all rooting for you.

[thewood1]

Just in case people don't read the other threads, I want to spread the good news from the Tico thread...

"I stand corrected on the weight"

This is the best news I've heard today. You actually read and comprehended something. Starting out with small things like this is the best way get on the path to getting better.

Now, to keep the momentum, I'd suggest going back to all the other threads you disrupted since you joined a couple weeks ago and really take the time to read and understand all the responses and the great source material posted. It'll take some time, but we will all be patient. I'm sure you'll have a few setbacks here and there, but we're here to help. I'll take on the role of your sponsor. If you feel yourself slipping and not reading the stuff that you and other forum members post, I'll be there to talk you through it.

[bladesinger79]

SO, range and jammers are the big factors with several smaller variables. How do I control the firing with my fighters so they are not shooting at max range automatically?

UPDATE: I found it. Weapons Hold. Silly me. I should have my CMO card docked a few points for stupidity.

[PN79]

Through "Side Doctrine, EMCON, WRA". It can be accessed in "GAME" header or you can set it for specific mission in Mission Editor.

EDIT: You can also set range for firings or how many ordnance to spent on one target.

[thewood1]

I'm going to point out that next to mission configurations, WRA is one of the most important concepts and functions in the entire game. Getting to know and use it is a big hurdle for new players and if you haven't worked with WRA yet, you should take a look.

[BrianinMinnie]

I'm going to point out that next to mission configurations, WRA is one of the most important concepts and functions in the entire game. Getting to know and use it is a big hurdle for new players and if you haven't worked with WRA yet, you should take a look.

Do we have any links to folks that have given great breakouts on WRA usage?
I have seen P Gatcomb's(Youtube) stuff, its really good, but I'm not sure its WRA specific.

Thanks

[thewood1]

Pro tip...search "command modern operation wra" on youtube. Frist couple of links look good.

[bladesinger79]

Chaff works when a missile is attacking from the flanks and rear. They should NOT be effective against head-on missile attacks correct?

[Dimitris]

Chaff works when a missile is attacking from the flanks and rear. They should NOT be effective against head-on missile attacks correct?

No, AFAIK the chaff cloud is an equally appealing distraction from head-on as well. (Open to correction)

[AKar]

Chaff works when a missile is attacking from the flanks and rear. They should NOT be effective against head-on missile attacks correct?

Technically chaff should be deployed preferably when flying near-perpendicular to the missile, where the missile can't reject the chaff cloud by the doppler shift of its echo rapidly diverging from the target's, which would be the case if chaff was released in head-on or rear-aspect situations.

Against a fairly common misconception, the chaff cloud is hardly ever positioned conveniently enough to actually block the missile seeker from viewing the target, and even if it was, it tends not to be dense enough for the seeker radar operating at wavelengths of few centimeters not to see through.