Dimitris
Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
|
Hi.
quote:
ORIGINAL: amizaur
It's hard to tell from 2D image but such "pursuit" end-game geometry could suggest that maybe something is not right with missile guidance algoritms. Proportional navigation rather should not result with "pursuit" finale. The missile should apply good amount of lead especially in final phase.
In theory, and against a "cooperative" target, this should happen more often than not (you can observe it, for example, when engaging cruise missiles or aircraft that are completely unaware they're being shot at). Against a guy who knows he's under fire and doing his best to avoid it, however, it is quite likely you'll end up in a variation of tail chase. If you're into combat flight sims, check some video replays of aircraft trying to beam incoming missiles and you will frequently observe the same pattern.
quote:
Also Ia have a feeling that missile should start it's final dive sooner, after reaching some predefinied down-angle value (not a predefinied point in space). I often see that missile starts it's dive too late, almost on top of a diving (evading) target - this is happening for me from some time, or few game versions... lot of missed shots because of this).
If this is something that you can consistently observe, please make a new thread with a suitable save for investigation. Thanks!
quote:
Another thing is that IMO a SAHR missile should not lose track of the target in such geometry as shown. The radar energy reflected from the target is NOT reflected "back only" but a good amount of it is reflected also at "forward" angles. So a target should be "visible" for missile at angles well over 90deg off the "radar-target" line. Maybe the amount of radar energy would be lower, but at this stage of intercept missile would be so close to target that it should detect it without problem.
If someone designing the SAHR guidance rules and algorithms set a hard 90deg limiter for SAHR radar-reflection geometry, then the limiter should be increased to something like 135deg (or maybe only the reflected energy shoudld be gradually decreased for high angles, but not fade to zero at 90deg off angle, only at much higher angle values).
What's your source on this? The reflection restriction was put in place by someone who _really_ understands radar stuff so we'd be reluctant to fiddle with it unless decisively shown that something is wrong. (And no, "a lot of my missile shots miss" is not in itself a sufficient threshold)
quote:
P.S. There is one more thing but it's probably not modelled - I'm not sure if a SAHR missile like Sparrow doesn't need to receive original (not reflected) radar wave of the guiding radar with an antena mounted of the rear of the missile. With such geometry as here the missile could be out of the guiding radar cone and stop receiving the feed of it's guiding radar. Not sure if this would breack the lock and guidance or only reduce it's resistance to enemy's ECM.
You may be thinking of the mid-course guidance feature of the R-27/AA-10 (prior to terminal SARH/IR). We don't currently model this. AFAIK no version of Sparrow uses this feature.
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
[WAD] SARH guiding is nonfunctional - 
)
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread