Nice breakdown. The visuals will help many to understand this better. A short bit on how transonic drag affects the missiles performance and how the missiles subsonic/supersonic flight control aerodynamics affect their maneuverability would have been nice too.
DCS AI + AA-10D + DCS weirdo AIM-120s = a massive headache. I can never seem to kill those guys without getting smacked by the AA-10 even if I know the WEZ.
Awesome video, and I learned something with TIPWI! A nitpick if you're interested: "Fox One/Two/Three" is a verb (brevity) not a noun. For example, one shouldn't say "These are fox-3 missiles". Use e.g. SAR/AR/IR/semi-active/active/infrared instead. "These are active missiles" -- This is basically verbatim echoing what I was told by a fighter pilot for reference.
I was struck by the significance of firing missies at targets beneath you and how that counterintuitively reduces the size of the WEZ. It instantly made me think about how the Spacex Falcon 9 bleeds off so much energy despite coming in vertically at very high Mach and it’s mainly because of increasing air density. The landing burn fires very late in landing phase.
What is the optimal maneuvering to kinetically defeat a radar-guided missile? Is it better to go cold and dive, or to do some weaving to make the missile change direction to lead you and loose energy?
Optimal depends on the condition, if you care only about safety then go cold, if you want initiative then crank and dive. Missiles booster last only for maybe 10 seconds, that and its gravity energy is all it has got, afaik you should let missile commit into certain direction and then when its past its boost turn opposite, if u need, dive to scrape its energy or if it is fox 3 possibly notch and chaff. Missiles are different so you have to know what to expect from specific planes. If you see fox3 creeping on your rwr you can also pull hard towards it when its about to hit you, it may be low enough energy where it cant follow. They fly way way farther in high alt than close to the ground and you can also degrade missile with jamming, dropping lock or making it easier to observe and defeat. Amraam cant jump on you without almost any warning from above with its inertial navigation if you activate jammers, link between missile and plane is broken and it is flying directly on your plane without any special tricks.
It depends on you and your targets range, altitude, and speed. Think of it like throwing a ball. Where you do need to aim the ball in order to arc it to the person your throwing it to? Same applies for missiles. Think about 'leading' your target. You want to launch at an angle optimal for the ballistic arc of a projectile (a little different because rocket motor but same principle). You can get a feel for this by launching a bunch of missiles at different scenarios and watching if the missile immediately pitches up or down off the rail. If you nailed the pitch angle, the missile will continue relatively straight off the rail.
The answer to this will be "it depends" (like most things in aviation). There will be an ideal ballistic angle for the missile, but that may not be perfect for you. When you pitch up high you do impart more angle on the missile, but you're also climbing quickly too. Climbing means a change in altitude and loss of airspeed, both of those will shrink your WEZ. The key takeaway here is that having any pitch angle at all is better than no pitch angle. And if you need a value, I've had good success with 15. However, I can't say I've tested every angle and found that one as the best. YMMV.
so i have a question about tipwi/pk: if my opponent takes evasive maneuvers, their aspect/aot changes, if i am certain a target will defend very early, should i push into the lower portion of the no escape zone to compensate for this, or does the p/k already account for more complex maneuvers like diving and alternating directions to drain the missiles energy? also to clarify, we still should try to maintain an increased altitude over our enemies because the range reduction we have is less than theirs, due to our missile starting in thin air and thus having more total speed, while theirs is in thicker air and fighting gravity simultaneously, correct? and lastly, is there any chance you have access to those tables? and why dont they account for altitude in any way? im certain theres a range difference if the co altitude shot is at 5000' or 40000'.
Question 1: TIPWI and Pk are different. TIPWI is the probability at the time of launch. Pk is for every available scenario. The AIM-120 is just above 50% Pk accounting for all uses in RL combat. But your individual probability will vary from one moment to the next (that is TIPWI). Any decision to shoot will be based on risk vs reward. So I can't give a canned answer that covers every possibility on when to shoot. If you think its worth the risk then get closer to the enemy before shooting. Question 2: Think back to the diagram of the WEZ I use in this series. It's parabolic which means the middle is always the longest part. Co-altitude shots have the longest WEZ. Anything else will be shorter. But sometimes that's okay. Also, being higher puts the enemy in ground clutter and takes you out of it. Question 3: Sorry I don't have the tables. Those are the kind of numbers people don't like to share publicly. I can only talk about the part that's been cleared for public release. Hope that answers your questions.
Why would higher pitch angle work for r27 fox 1 missile? It just spends the extra energy to immediately correct itself for the shortest interception point.
Holy moly, was i wrooooooooong...i did 4 tests, 2x direct shot / 2x curved between 20 and 30 degrees pitch with R27ER. Direct shot alt 7943 m dstnc 45,3 km mach 1,15 initial g pulled 1,4g (how much missile pulled during boost max g to aim at target) ... impact time 53,27s mach 0,89 Curved shot 27,6 dgrs pitch alt 8081 m dstnc 43,8 km mach 1,07 initial g pulled 3,1g ... impact time 43,43s mach 1,55 The other attempt at 22 degrees did a little bit better.
Do R-27s correct for the shortest interception point? They have range and alt information from the plane and the radar, so it can plan for an optimal flight path instead. EDIT: Likely only at launch, not after, like in some missiles such as AIM-120 which use datalink to communicate and not just pure radar reflections.
What a time to be alive. Imagine having this type of content and DCS to test and experience when you're still a youngling.
Indeed
watching this video during alg 2 rn
Nice breakdown. The visuals will help many to understand this better. A short bit on how transonic drag affects the missiles performance and how the missiles subsonic/supersonic flight control aerodynamics affect their maneuverability would have been nice too.
DCS AI + AA-10D + DCS weirdo AIM-120s = a massive headache. I can never seem to kill those guys without getting smacked by the AA-10 even if I know the WEZ.
Awesome as always, thanks Mike!
Awesome video, and I learned something with TIPWI!
A nitpick if you're interested:
"Fox One/Two/Three" is a verb (brevity) not a noun. For example, one shouldn't say "These are fox-3 missiles". Use e.g. SAR/AR/IR/semi-active/active/infrared instead. "These are active missiles" -- This is basically verbatim echoing what I was told by a fighter pilot for reference.
Some really good guidance and analysis.
Always great content and well explained. Thanks as always!
thank you for the video
I was struck by the significance of firing missies at targets beneath you and how that counterintuitively reduces the size of the WEZ. It instantly made me think about how the Spacex Falcon 9 bleeds off so much energy despite coming in vertically at very high Mach and it’s mainly because of increasing air density. The landing burn fires very late in landing phase.
im a 15yo dumbo, this is explained very well'
Just a heads up, your BVR part 2 video isn't in the BVR playlist :)
Thanks. Not sure how that happened but its fixed now.
@@user-tm1kb3fq4m I do eventually want to make a series on navigation (which would cover these areas). But that is a ways off.
What is the optimal maneuvering to kinetically defeat a radar-guided missile? Is it better to go cold and dive, or to do some weaving to make the missile change direction to lead you and loose energy?
Optimal depends on the condition, if you care only about safety then go cold, if you want initiative then crank and dive.
Missiles booster last only for maybe 10 seconds, that and its gravity energy is all it has got, afaik you should let missile commit into certain direction and then when its past its boost turn opposite, if u need, dive to scrape its energy or if it is fox 3 possibly notch and chaff. Missiles are different so you have to know what to expect from specific planes.
If you see fox3 creeping on your rwr you can also pull hard towards it when its about to hit you, it may be low enough energy where it cant follow.
They fly way way farther in high alt than close to the ground and you can also degrade missile with jamming, dropping lock or making it easier to observe and defeat.
Amraam cant jump on you without almost any warning from above with its inertial navigation if you activate jammers, link between missile and plane is broken and it is flying directly on your plane without any special tricks.
What would be the optimal pitch angle?
It depends on you and your targets range, altitude, and speed. Think of it like throwing a ball. Where you do need to aim the ball in order to arc it to the person your throwing it to? Same applies for missiles. Think about 'leading' your target. You want to launch at an angle optimal for the ballistic arc of a projectile (a little different because rocket motor but same principle). You can get a feel for this by launching a bunch of missiles at different scenarios and watching if the missile immediately pitches up or down off the rail. If you nailed the pitch angle, the missile will continue relatively straight off the rail.
For the AMRAAM in DCS it is 30 degrees unless you are very close.
The answer to this will be "it depends" (like most things in aviation). There will be an ideal ballistic angle for the missile, but that may not be perfect for you.
When you pitch up high you do impart more angle on the missile, but you're also climbing quickly too. Climbing means a change in altitude and loss of airspeed, both of those will shrink your WEZ.
The key takeaway here is that having any pitch angle at all is better than no pitch angle. And if you need a value, I've had good success with 15. However, I can't say I've tested every angle and found that one as the best. YMMV.
so i have a question about tipwi/pk: if my opponent takes evasive maneuvers, their aspect/aot changes, if i am certain a target will defend very early, should i push into the lower portion of the no escape zone to compensate for this, or does the p/k already account for more complex maneuvers like diving and alternating directions to drain the missiles energy?
also to clarify, we still should try to maintain an increased altitude over our enemies because the range reduction we have is less than theirs, due to our missile starting in thin air and thus having more total speed, while theirs is in thicker air and fighting gravity simultaneously, correct?
and lastly, is there any chance you have access to those tables? and why dont they account for altitude in any way? im certain theres a range difference if the co altitude shot is at 5000' or 40000'.
Question 1: TIPWI and Pk are different. TIPWI is the probability at the time of launch. Pk is for every available scenario. The AIM-120 is just above 50% Pk accounting for all uses in RL combat. But your individual probability will vary from one moment to the next (that is TIPWI). Any decision to shoot will be based on risk vs reward. So I can't give a canned answer that covers every possibility on when to shoot. If you think its worth the risk then get closer to the enemy before shooting.
Question 2: Think back to the diagram of the WEZ I use in this series. It's parabolic which means the middle is always the longest part. Co-altitude shots have the longest WEZ. Anything else will be shorter. But sometimes that's okay. Also, being higher puts the enemy in ground clutter and takes you out of it.
Question 3: Sorry I don't have the tables. Those are the kind of numbers people don't like to share publicly. I can only talk about the part that's been cleared for public release.
Hope that answers your questions.
@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom ah, okay, thanks for the reply!
Why would higher pitch angle work for r27 fox 1 missile? It just spends the extra energy to immediately correct itself for the shortest interception point.
Holy moly, was i wrooooooooong...i did 4 tests, 2x direct shot / 2x curved between 20 and 30 degrees pitch with R27ER.
Direct shot
alt 7943 m
dstnc 45,3 km
mach 1,15
initial g pulled 1,4g (how much missile pulled during boost max g to aim at target)
...
impact
time 53,27s
mach 0,89
Curved shot 27,6 dgrs pitch
alt 8081 m
dstnc 43,8 km
mach 1,07
initial g pulled 3,1g
...
impact
time 43,43s
mach 1,55
The other attempt at 22 degrees did a little bit better.
Do R-27s correct for the shortest interception point? They have range and alt information from the plane and the radar, so it can plan for an optimal flight path instead. EDIT: Likely only at launch, not after, like in some missiles such as AIM-120 which use datalink to communicate and not just pure radar reflections.