AAW Patrol question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

AAW Patrol question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> AAW Patrol question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 5:41:10 AM

ridgeback68

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline

Hey all,

Just a query about behaviour in an AAW Patrol.

As an example I have F-18Es with AIM-120D on an AAW Patrol with a prosecution zone. Bogeys are identified as Su-27s (armed with PL-12 missiles).

The F-18s head off into the prosecution zone to intercept as advertised and in accordance with their WRA fire off a couple of AMRAAMs which out-range the PL-12.

The issue is that the F-18s continue to follow their own missiles towards the targets and bring themselves into range of counter-fire from the Su-27s.

I know there's a maintain stand off option for Anti Surface warfare but I can't find one for AAW.

Is there any way of maintaining a 'stand off' distance to allow the F-18s to take advantage of their longer ranged missiles? At the moment I micro manage each engagement which can become a pain in the ass, especially in the bigger scenarios.

The same applies to any other aircraft that uses longer ranged missiles, eg PL-15 armed fighters vs F-18 etc.

Thanks in advance

Post #: 1

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 7:06:29 AM

Cik

Posts: 671
Joined: 10/5/2016
Status: offline

hi.

aircraft armed with active radar homing missiles (such as AIM-120D / PL-12) cannot really turn away until the missile enters it's active phase which requires relatively close proximity to the target. aircraft in the game do turn to radar gimbal limits (sometimes) in order to minimize closure speed, however if they turn away as in a standoff lase maneuver they will lose the target and thus the ability to provide mid-course guidance to the weapon (mostly rendering it harmless)

your range still gives you a rather sizable advantage in PK%, though, even if you usually will have to enter WEZ in order to have a chance of hitting the flanker.

(in reply to ridgeback68)

Post #: 2

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 9:03:55 AM

Gunner98

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline

You could change the behaviour by having a second pair approaching from another direction, they can pick up the missiles with their radar allowing the first pair to reduce closure rate.

You can also change your Shotgun settings but then there is an issue with RTB~ing to early.

If you change your WRA settings and increase the number of missiles they fire at the first target - say to 3 o4 4 and change the Shotgun setting to 1 engagement only they would dump and run.

B

(in reply to Cik)

Post #: 3

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 9:35:27 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Is it cranking? (Slowing to loiter, veering off to the side, on the edge of the radar scan limits). This is the expected behavior.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Cik)

Post #: 4

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 11:16:24 AM

hellfish6

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Is it cranking? (Slowing to loiter, veering off to the side, on the edge of the radar scan limits). This is the expected behavior.

I think I've only seen that behavior with SARH missiles like the AIM-7.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 5

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 11:43:52 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

It's also the expected behavior for ARH shooters. The chief difference is that the ARH shooters veer off to a lesser degree, because the radar scan limits are typically tighter than the SARH illumination limits.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to hellfish6)

Post #: 6

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 11:51:06 AM

ridgeback68

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline

Thanks for the responses guys.

If I got this right the AMRAAM and equivalents are not truly 'fire and forget'. They still need in flight guidance for longer range shots until the missile itself goes active.

From what Gunner has said that guidance can be provided by a source other than the shooter. Does this apply to AWACS as well ie can an E-2D guide an AMRAAM fired from an F-18E? I know I could turn datalinks on and confirm for myself but you guys are a wealth of information...

Sunburn, can't say I've seen the cranking behaviour but will run through a few tests when I get the chance. I'm likely doing something wrong. If I can reproduce what I think is happening I will post a save.

Cheers

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 7

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 6:17:44 PM

Gneckes

Posts: 212
Joined: 6/22/2015
Status: offline

Yes, the AMRAAM (and other advanced MRAAMs like the Meteor and PL-15) have datalink capability, meaning they can be guided to the rough vicinity of the target by other platforms than the shooter. At least in CMANO where, by default, all units are linked together.

(in reply to ridgeback68)

Post #: 8

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 6:40:00 PM

Raptorx7_slith

Posts: 380
Joined: 7/27/2013
Status: offline

Active radar guided missiles do not need the aircraft's radar to be on or anything else guiding it to fire or guide to the target, at least in CMANO. I have always thought that was WAD because its been around forever in the game.

(in reply to Gneckes)

Post #: 9

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 7:43:36 PM

Hongjian

Posts: 834
Joined: 1/2/2015
Status: offline

This is also a question I would like to ask.

If, as ridgeback68 did, it was possible to micro-manage each plane to turn around after they have launched their ARH BVRAAMs and the missiles will still find their targets with their onboard radar or through datalinking with AWACS and other sensors, then shouldnt it be possible to add a WRA setting or an automatic AI-behavior where the shooter immediately pulls back once it launched a volley of its BVRAAMs, as long as the targeting data can be provided by other assets? As of now, I feel that all aircraft AAW behavior is modeled after SARH missile mechanics, where the shooter needs to keep its nose pointed towards the target at all times.

At the same time, I feel like SARH missiles are extremely powerless in a fight against enemy planes that are shooting back with ARH AAMs, since the moment the shooter engages defensives, it will break lock with the target and all its missiles missing their targets. I felt so sorry for the Vietnamese Su-27SKs in that 2nd mission of COW; even with their masses of R-27ERs that individually outrange my PL-12s, they didnt manage to down even one of my J-8Fs armed with PL-12s, since all their missiles missed the moment they were forced to engage in defensives when confronted with my PL-12s.

In the real world, it seems that there are defensive techniques that helps SARH equipped planes to maintain lock within gimbal limits of their FCR while engaging in maneuvers designed to bleed out the energy of enemy missiles.
Examples like "Snaking" would be these (from the DCS/LockOn simulator game): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RzT8N934sQ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiL5MV2-M3c

(in reply to Raptorx7_slith)

Post #: 10

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/4/2017 11:13:21 PM

Cik

Posts: 671
Joined: 10/5/2016
Status: offline

SARH vs ARH is naturally uphill- while it's possible to win in sims this is mostly due to CM rejection failures (usually a %chance) unless you outnumber the enemy 2-1 and come into the fight with superior energy (in which case you will likely draw anyway due to launch & leave tactics) forcing a victory is inordinately hard.

personally i actually think command undermodels the advantages of ARH missiles. cheap shot + turn away allows you to kill stuff with almost no hope of reprisal and command does not really model all the dirty tricks you can get up to with ARH AAMs.

(in reply to Hongjian)

Post #: 11

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/5/2017 5:01:24 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

See, this is the kind of thread I love to show to anyone who heckles us with the typical "You get into too much detail, your design should abstract things" argument.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Cik)

Post #: 12

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/5/2017 11:05:26 AM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

I dunno. Perhaps gamers loves micromanagements in many reasons, but ends up frustrated because there are too many things for players to adjust, and still insist to have them for 'better' management.

I do remember the game Fleet Command can mod doctrines, so the unit will automatically do some doctrine-based maneuvers without scripting from editor. It's moddable but very difficult to get everything works as intended (like High-G Pull and Supersonic sea-skimming maneuver doctrines will often make jets crash themselves, so the extra "plane_not_fish" doctrine is needed to reduce that).

Customizable doctrine and auto-mission planners could be a very useful features, especially for AI side. I guess AI design is just as difficult as the game itself, so put it a better way, this game 'thinks' a lot more than many other arcade RTS games.

< Message edited by Dysta -- 7/5/2017 11:08:42 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 13

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/6/2017 12:28:55 AM

ridgeback68

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline

Thanks to everyone for your input. Just to be clear, this wasn't a whinge, just a question. The main reason I asked was that in a number of COW scenarios there is a hefty points penalty for losing one of your own aircraft. I thought there may be a more efficient way of minimising the risk to my own aircraft, especially when they have technically superior weapons.

< Message edited by ridgeback68 -- 7/6/2017 12:29:52 AM >

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 14

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/6/2017 12:56:37 AM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hongjian
In the real world, it seems that there are defensive techniques that helps SARH equipped planes to maintain lock within gimbal limits of their FCR while engaging in maneuvers designed to bleed out the energy of enemy missiles.
Examples like "Snaking" would be these (from the DCS/LockOn simulator game): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RzT8N934sQ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiL5MV2-M3c

I'd be hesitant about quoting DCS when it comes to missile kinematics. DCS doesn't model missile lofting, and thus tends to exaggerate the amount of energy the missile will bleed with G/α. As it currently stands, missiles in C:MANO don't bleed any energy for G/α (except for the extra distance traveled) - an improved missile model and improved BVR maneuvers are high on my wish list. The abstracted model presently gives good results, but improving one side is going to require improving the other. It would be nice to see BVR defensive tactics modeled to reflect maneuvers that create problems for missile intercept (Something like this, for example), but that's a can of worms that may have to wait for Command 2.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cik
personally i actually think command undermodels the advantages of ARH missiles. cheap shot + turn away allows you to kill stuff with almost no hope of reprisal and command does not really model all the dirty tricks you can get up to with ARH AAMs.

Are you talking about "taking a cheap shot" where the missile is completely unsupported, or the actual term CHEAPSHOT where an AIM-120 is supported to it's HPRF active range? Everything I've read indicates that AIM-120 launches are almost worthless without some kind of support to ensure that the target is actually in the missiles acquisition bucket when it goes active (this likely applies to AA-12/PL-12 as well).

Emphasis mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tornado F3 in Focus: A Navigator's Eye on Britain's Last Interceptor
The first level of AMRAAM integration was the Capability Sustainment Programme (CSP) in 1999-2002, but it took some time to convince a skeptical Air Plans that adding AMRAAM without the mid-course guidance was too little, too late, and would invite continuing obsolescence despite significant cost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: An F-4F ICE (AIM-120 and APG-65) pilot commenting on BVR tactics in this thread
ROE will always be paramount - but in a -120 Scenario with a obviously aware Bandit (as he�s flying hot to you) you should have a missile in the air at that distance and should be supporting it. Usually before launch and thereafter you want that supporting data to be accurate and with minimal chance of losing the radar contact. TWS is based on predicting the targets moves while it scans (briefly) another one. At 15nm a (smart) aware bandit will maneuver and therefore has a high chance of dropping out of the volume of air TWS expects it to be in in the next radar sweep. The radar contact is lost, your SA goes down and the missile is no longer supported.

TWS is good for getting a general overview - but not something to use at close range or with maneuvering contacts. You want to be in STT to shoot and keep that to support the missile. Your formation should have gained enough SA before the shots (i.e. well before meld range) and sorted accordingly.

Some aircraft have "HD-TWS" which may be used at closer ranges against better maneuvering targets. The standard TWS, as seen in this radar, is not recommended for the above mentioned reasons.

The assumption is that in real life, you're shooting at someone who very much wants to stay alive, and they will be maneuvering aggressively, with the intent that they will not be where your missile originally expected them to be. The missile won't acquire the target, and you've wasted a shot.

The brevity term CHEAPSHOT is simply leaving the missile with a less reliable independent solution than waiting for PITBULL at MPRF active. Given range uncertainty with HPRF, the missile will have a lower PoH than if it received updates all the way to PITBULL. The actual mechanics of the communication with the missile get classified very quickly, and there's really no open source discussion on it beyond that it uses the launching aircraft radar.

(in reply to Hongjian)

Post #: 15

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/6/2017 1:20:34 AM

Cik

Posts: 671
Joined: 10/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

Are you talking about "taking a cheap shot" where the missile is completely unsupported, or the actual term CHEAPSHOT where an AIM-120 is supported to it's HPRF active range? Everything I've read indicates that AIM-120 launches are almost worthless without some kind of support to ensure that the target is actually in the missiles acquisition bucket when it goes active (this likely applies to AA-12/PL-12 as well).

Emphasis mine.

CHEAPSHOT as in slicing and skating early. you can gain an extra 6-8 seconds on that which is a reasonable tradeoff in survivability vs. PK. if you are going mach 1.2+ and you should be, that's quite a bit of extra spacing to exploit for defensive maneuvering.

in CMANO, aircraft stay VERY offensive and only begin shooting at what seems to me to be midway through RPI- IRL it seems to me that half the shots taken will be relatively easy kinetic defeats only aimed to push the bandit into a defensive posture and a lower energy state. often in CMANO a fighter will keep turning offensive even when he has lost (but not died) when it would be wiser to extend and escape.

basically: in CMANO aircraft prioritize staying offensive to kill the enemy over survival for the most part, which isn't bad but it kind of undermodels ARH strength because IRL what you'd do is likely fire to suppress, fire to kill, then turn/dive/beam/extend before the bandit entered PL-12 range at all. actually entering bandit RPI except maybe at the farthest edge is not wise if you can avoid it.

(in reply to ExNusquam)

Post #: 16

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/6/2017 2:23:38 AM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cik
in CMANO, aircraft stay VERY offensive and only begin shooting at what seems to me to be midway through RPI- IRL it seems to me that half the shots taken will be relatively easy kinetic defeats only aimed to push the bandit into a defensive posture and a lower energy state. often in CMANO a fighter will keep turning offensive even when he has lost (but not died) when it would be wiser to extend and escape.

That honestly sounds like a WRA setting designed to encourage higher PoH in endgame, as opposed to a game issue. However, you incorrectly assume that a defensive posture will result in a lower energy state - a properly flown ascending or level drag defense will result in the defender re-committing with about the same energy state (although it will have traded position to maintain energy - not good if on a HVACAP!).

quote:

basically: in CMANO aircraft prioritize staying offensive to kill the enemy over survival for the most part, which isn't bad but it kind of undermodels ARH strength because IRL what you'd do is likely fire to suppress, fire to kill, then turn/dive/beam/extend before the bandit entered PL-12 range at all. actually entering bandit RPI except maybe at the farthest edge is not wise if you can avoid it.

Technically the range you're referring to in C:MANO is Ropt since all the missiles are lofted if they support it. Although Raero, Ropt and Rpi are really all Falcon/AMRAAM specific terms - they're just Rmax for different termination criteria.

So you're correct that aircraft in C:MANO are a bit overly aggressive - but that misses the point that in real life, dropping an active missile before it's gone pitbull will significantly reduce it's chances of acquiring the target, reducing PoH. If the missile doesn't acquire it won't have the suppression effect you're counting on - and now you're likely in his WEZ if you re-commit. You can't count on the bad guys being stupid in real life

(in reply to Cik)

Post #: 17

RE: AAW Patrol question - 7/6/2017 3:07:21 AM

Cik

Posts: 671
Joined: 10/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cik

That honestly sounds like a WRA setting designed to encourage higher PoH in endgame, as opposed to a game issue. However, you incorrectly assume that a defensive posture will result in a lower energy state - a properly flown ascending or level drag defense will result in the defender re-committing with about the same energy state (although it will have traded position to maintain energy - not good if on a HVACAP!).

it suppresses SA and may defeat any SARH missile / degrade performance of any ARH missile they have fired at you, though. if you close the range enough while they are defensive they may recommit with insufficient spacing to actually survive the follow on shot. generally speaking i follow musashi's advice here: it is better to be on the offensive than the reverse.

quote:

So you're correct that aircraft in C:MANO are a bit overly aggressive - but that misses the point that in real life, dropping an active missile before it's gone pitbull will significantly reduce it's chances of acquiring the target, reducing PoH.

this is probably true.

quote:

So you're correct that aircraft in C:MANO are a bit overly aggressive - but that misses the point that in real life, dropping an active missile before it's gone pitbull will significantly reduce it's chances of acquiring the target, reducing PoH. If the missile doesn't acquire it won't have the suppression effect you're counting on - and now you're likely in his WEZ if you re-commit.

it depends a great deal on whether or not the target pre-emptively goes defensive (to the beam etc.) if he does not he risks dying as the ARHAAM pitbulls on him- if he does there will be a follow-on shot as he recommits nose on to the AMRAAM shooter. there is no really good decision. such is life when you are being fired at with ARH i suppose. i don't agree that i am in his WEZ- if he is armed with a shorter F-pole than i am he will be the one recommitting into me; either after he realizes the AMRAAM is not going to pitbull onto him or after he completes his maneuvers to trash it. at that point a follow-on shot occurs and repeat whole process again. all the while he is a cold bandit and i can close to ensure my follow-up attacks are successively more lethal. keep in mind that if he is trying to stay offensive he will go into the beam to defend and the AMRAAM shooter will be closing at mach 1.2+ the whole time. any time his nose gets 30+ degrees hot he'll be shot again and have to defend.

in a even-numbers fight a small F-pole advantage is probably going to be quite telling because of this effect- you can keep them at bay all day while hurling stuff at them. it should be quite easy to play the zone where "i can kill him if he remains hot but if i remain hot he cannot kill me" convert that to "if he turns hot i will fire again and continue closing" to "i am almost right on top of him and now he is screwed no matter what"

as long as you have enough missiles.

quote:

You can't count on the bad guys being stupid in real life

do you have any proof of this claim?

(in reply to ExNusquam)