Distinct "PHX" marker instead of generic "MSL" for AIM-54 active seeker on RWR

Suggestions Interface
1
[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

I did not make this into a bug report because the RWRs that can classify the exact radar / emitter type are quite modern and most of them are still classified. So there are no documents to bug report such capability.

As you know, (in the game) there are two ways to defeat a radar guided missile:

1- Notching
2- Using multipath (AKA hugging the ground)

Each method has its pros and cons.
For example hugging the ground has the advantage of allowing you to stay offensive.

But there is one family of missiles in the game, that this method (hugging the ground) does not work against: AIM-54

Due to high explosive mass of these missiles, even if you hug the ground and try to use the multipath effect to make the missile miss, the splash damage from the heavy warhead will still kill or severely damage you.

Which means the only method you can use to defeat the AIM-54 family of missiles, is notching.

But unfortunately, in the game, RWRs, even ones that have the ability to classify the exact emitter type, do not differentiate between different ARH missiles. They show “MSL” for all types of ARH missiles.

So you have no way of knowing whether the incoming missile is an AIM-54 (which you can’t use the multipath effect against) or e.g. an AIM-120 (which you can use the multipath effect to defeat)

Imgur

So I suggest adding an indicator text for AIM-54’s active seeker that is distinct from other Fox 3 missiles, on RWR displays (that can classify the exact type of the emitter).

E.g. show “PHX” instead of “MSL” for AIM-54.

This would be quite useful. By knowing that the incoming missile is an AIM-54, you will know that you can’t use the multipath effect to defeat this missile and have to instead resort to notching.

In terms of realism/technicality, AIM-54’s signal pattern is most likely different enough from other Fox 3 missiles, for the RWRs (that can classify the exact type of the emitter) to be able to distinguish between them …

Also thanks to @Flame2512 and @Morvran, there is apparently historical evidence that at least Tornado’s RWR could distinguish the AIM-54 seeker:

image

So there is no reason why other RWR’s that can classify the radar / emitter type, wouldn’t be able to do so.

( As I have explained here the devs already assume all RWRs (that can classify emitter type) have a complete and flawless fingerprint/signature database.)

EDIT:

Additionally, while distinguishing between other families of ARH missiles doesn’t change much in terms of gameplay, it could still add to the “cool factor”.

So adding a distinct marker for other families of ARH missiles e.g. “120” for AIM-120, “R77” for R-77, “P12” for PL-12 and “MIC” for MICA-EM etc could be nice too.

1 Like
2

It would be down to someone else to say whether this was the case or not IRL. But Im surprised RWRs that can differentiate between different radars, like the one found on the Tornado, cant also tell the difference between the radar used in different Missiles and thus include that information on the RWR display (would be a great help to know if it was an Aim-54, AMRAAM, R-77, MICA, etc when defending against a threat)

4 Likes
4

While distinguishing between other families of ARH missiles doesn’t change much in terms of gameplay, it could still add to the “cool factor”.

Appended that to the first post.

1 Like
5

It might. Different missiles have different overall performance. So if you are knowledgeable enough you might be able to make use of that info. If nothing else. Might give you a hint as to what is firing at you

1 Like
6

I’m inclined to say no. While I don’t know if its realistic (per say), I think the deliberate omission of what type of missile it is adds to both the tension and challenge. You don’t have a 100% on what you should do to counter it, and therefore you need to do something you think will work rather than you know will work.
My worry with something like this is that this feature will be interpreted as somewhat of an “easy” and “cheesy” thing; you’ll know exactly what is coming towards you, and exactly how to defend against it, instead of having to guess by the RWR emissions of the aircraft’s radar. While yes, it takes ambiguity out of the picture, it also makes it far too easy to rely on this as a “crutch”.

2 Likes
7

Is this realistic?

8

Also this is untrue lmao. You can in fact defeat Phoenixes by out maneuvering them, running away, notching, or multipath (this one is not 100% of course).

9

I asked Gunjob if RWRs (like the one on the tornado) could differentiate between the seekers of ARH missiles and he said “maybe” but didn’t have any sources to prove or disprove it.

So it might be historically accurate, at least for advanced RWRs

10

Counter argument is that this will allow you to develop your skills and use the proper method for defeating different types of ARH missiles.

Without this you are simply relying on chance (It might or might not be an AIM-54).
With this, you can develop some skill.

11

I’m not writing a guide on how to defeat air to air missiles.

I had previously made another instance of this suggestion but it was deleted because “it had less than 200 words”.
So I added some extra fluff to make it 300 words.

To anyone who has played top tier it’s obvious that you can’t use multipath against AIM-54.
Yes, it’s theoretically possible, just like it’s possible to win the $1B lottery. But the window for it is so narrow and situational that you can never rely on this method against the AIM-54.

12

It’s seemingly unrealistic, so not my jam, but good idea/suggestion post nonetheless

13

While yeah you can develop methods for defeating different missiles I think what would be developed as-is would be ways of defeating all ARHs. Of course, it is always a game of chance, which is probably not a good thing, but make anything a yes/no even split and it’s just boring.
And skill can develop with the current model as well, it would be the skill to exploit certain methods to defeat missiles rather than the “skill” to look at the RWR, go “this thing is tracking me, I can just do this and it’s gone,” which doesn’t seem skillful to me.
A feature like this might be best for Arcade, I don’t really see the point of it in Realistic, and even less so in Sim.

15

Electronic warfare is a very dynamic field anyways.

Just because an RWR can distinguish between different signal patterns (different radars) doesn’t mean it will have the signature for all radars in existence in its database.

That country has to actually have electronic warfare / SIGINT units (either in air or on the ground) near the area where that aircraft / radar operates, to record its emissions and essentially “fingerprint it”, and then add it to their aircrafts’ RWR’s database.

But in the game, for obvious reasons (for one the fact that it’s a very dynamic thing IRL), the developers assume that if an RWR has the capability to classify emitters, then it also gets a complete and flawless fingerprint database in the game.

So as far as ARH missiles go, the important factor is not the plane’s RWR. Any RWR that can classify emitters / radars should be enough.
The important factor is actually the missile itself. I.e. the signal pattern of AIM-54’s seeker has to be different enough from AIM-120’s seeker.

16

Well, given the time gap between AIM-54 and AIM-120 it’s very likely that their radars’ signal pattern is different enough for RWRs that can classify radar type to distinguish between them.

And for other ARH missiles such as R-77, obviously their signal pattern is different enough from AIM-54 for RWRs to distinguish between them.

17

Again, multipathing isn’t the only way to defeat them. Also there are other ways of identifying if a Phoenix is headed towards you like looking with your eyes. Phoenixes have smoke trails that last for 26s, once you get a missile alert warning seconds later you can assume that its a Phoenix headed towards you, if you don’t have a missile launch warning then play safe and go defensive.

18

Thanks for the advice, but the whole point of this suggestion is so that you don’t have to go defensive e.g. against an AIM-120 / R-77/ … that you can much more reliably defeat using the multipath effect.

19

Unless this is realistic this shouldn’t be added. You’re almost at top tier, you should already have the game sense to assume what was launched towards you. You should also know how to not put yourself in a position to resort to only using multipathing and heave breathing room to notch or go cold or defeat the missile kinematically.

Like what’s next? You’re gonna ask for labels on missile diamonds to tell if the missile has IRCCM so you know how many flares to drop?

20

Well, distinction between AIM-54 and things such as R-77 or PL-12 is basically almost definitely realistic.

The main unknown factor is whether AIM-54’s and AIM-120’s onboard radar have different enough signal pattern.

That’s a poor comparison.
I’m not asking for new mechanics.
I’m asking for missile fingerprints in RWR databases.
As I have explained here the devs already assume all RWRs (that can classify emitter type) have a complete and flawless fingerprint/signature database.

And it’s virtually certain that missiles such as R-77 or PL-12 have different signatures compared to AIM-120 and AIM-54.

The only point of uncertainty here is whether missiles such as AIM-120 have different enough signature from AIM-54.

Given the gap in time/technology between these two missiles, it’s very likely that their signal pattern/signature is distinguishable from each other.

21

So assuming at least the aircrafts with RWR that can distinguish different radars can get this feature?

Is it? You want an identifier on missiles so you know which type of defense is best through the RWR am I wrong?

One thing I’m confused about is why you’re concerned with the Phoenix in particular. Planes that get RWR that can identify different radars don’t see the Phoenix as a threat unless you’re intentionally flying like an idiot.

22

Not “at least”.
“Only” aircrafts with RWRs that can classify radar types can get this feature.

Not on the missile.
On the RWR, and only when the missile goes active.
That’s basically RWRs job.

BTW now that we are making poor comparisons:
How about we remove RWR altogether? RWR seems like a handholding mechanic. Remove RWR altogether and have people stay defensive all the time.

I don’t think you even understood what this suggestion is about.

This suggestion in a nutshell and explained in simple language:

You can defeat missiles such as AIM-120 and R-77 using the multipath effect.
This is advantageous compared to notching (or going cold etc) as it lets you stay offensive.

But this method fails against AIM-54 (due to the large warhead and splash damage).

Because there is no distinction on the RWR between various types of ARH missiles:

1- You either have to forgo using the multipath effect to defeat ARH missiles.
2- Or die every once in a while, because the missile coming at you was the odd ball AIM-54 and not a “small caliber ARH” such as AIM-120 or R-77 or PL-12.

Your argument of “you can defeat AIM-54 using other methods” is irrelevant here.
The point is that you can’t reliably defeat the AIM-54 using multipath. And because you can’t reliably know what type of ARH missile is coming at you, you have to either not use multipathing at all or die every once in a while to a AIM-54 that you thought is a e.g. AIM-120 or R-77.