This seems like a great solution , +1
2 Likes
Here’s my bug report regarding the AIM-7M’s min alt: Community Bug Reporting System
its been acknowledged, just like many other bug reports regarding min alt of radar missiles and excessive multipath issues in-game, but still not being acted upon by gaijin.
1 Like
Hypothetically, what would you say if they respond that RIM-7M operates over water which has less multipath issues than over ground?
Theres not much i can say, they design the game, and ver the last few years have proven themselves to just design things however they want whenever they want, for whatever reason they want.
My counterargument to that though would be that even if thats true, water at sea can vary between having much less or much more radar interference based on waves, and that if this was a substantial issue for the missile, it would be a pretty crap self defense tool vs sea skimming missiles, yet its still used in navies across the world.
Even with WT’s simplified modeling, a 1900% increase in min alt is egregious and excessive, PARTICULARLY when you consider that WT planes are flown in 3rd person, allowing for much greater spatial awareness allowing for much easier and safer low latitude flight, and with many extra aids such as the spotting system and now contrails favouring flying low as well. There is no reason why an AFK player flying at 90m from the ground, or even 50m imo, should be completely immune to radar missiles.
To add to that, I am almost certain that radar missiles pre-AIM-7F addition were actually more capable in look down and low alt intercepts than they are now. Multipath was implemented in an excessive manner across all radars and radar guided ordinance.
The current low alt meta is also just toxic imo and wont change until the safe zone sub-100m is removed or at the very least reduced. I understand multipath is a thing, and i dont mind it being in-game, but something like 20m alt, not 95m…
3 Likes
I would point out that a report on Skyflash’s performance explicitly states it can hit targets at an altitude of 100 ft (33 m) over ground or sea:
In addition the original requirements set by the MOD for Skyflash required the contractor to show that the missile would be capable of intercepting targets at 100 ft over both sea and terrain, so it was clearly designed from the very beginning with that capability in mind:
4 Likes
Yeah… theres really no good reason why these radar missiles are being held back so badly in the minimum altitude portion of their WEZ
1 Like
Gaijin needs to curb new vehicle development until they can master the current weapons/radar systems, and add appropriate game modes to accommodate these new systems.
4 Likes
I should mention though those documents do not state at what RCS of a target it can hit at 100 feet. I should also mention that Stepanovich last stressed about the RCS of a target.
He mentioned that the stated minimum operating altitude of R-27s claimed by the government was 20m in altitude. But in actual practice, couldn’t do that reliably and could only hit targets with an RCS of a large bomber or something to that effect.
As far as AIM-7M hitting as low as 5m over the sea which has less multipath, even that sounds dubious.
USS Stark’s search radar and CIWS failed to even detect two incoming Exocets before it struck the ships.
And we have proof that Exocets cruise at 10m in altitude before striking ships, which is double that of 5m.
So if these radars of the same time period as AIM-7M failed to even detect cruise missiles at 10 meters, then how would AIM-7M itself?
I’m convinced the actual minimum operating altitude is much less than 100m for fighter sized targets however.
All firing envelopes in the first report are given for a 5m2 target:
4 Likes
I stand corrected then. I’d be more than happy for 30m to be the standard than 100m.
2 Likes
WT conditions are idealized conditions regardless, thats why conical scan seekers dont randomly miss targets.
What sounds to be more likely following your comment regarding the R-27 is that once again, gaijin has nerfed western weapons based on russian weapon capabilities, as has previously happened with the stinger and mistral being nerfed to match the igla’s performance because gaijin “couldnt imagine that western manpads could be better than the igla”
Regardless, we have official sources stating 5m for the 7M and 33m for the Skyflash as min alts, and the current min alt is 1900% higher than the stated 7M min alt, and still around 200% greater than the skyflash min alt.
Just halving it to 40-45m would already be much better gameplay-wise, and much more realistic.
The USS Stark incident also doesnt say anything against the RIM-7M capabilities seeing as the RIM-7M was not employed on that ship.
3 Likes
But there’s no RCS figure given for the 7M. 33m for Skyflash at 5m^2 over ground is relatively straightforward. 5m^2 could be only over the sea at higher RCS, especially as RIM-7M is over the waters.
The other big issue is, even if multipath was reduced to 33m, people still have that option enabled that allows them to not crash into the ground if they’re flying too low. I forgot what the setting is called. It hand-hold ground huggers.
Radars > Missiles. If a radar of that time cannot detect a missile at that altitude, neither would a missile of the same time from the same country*.
Like I said, I dont mind the AIM-7M’s min alt ingame being a bit higher than that seen in the documents, I understand 5m is likely an ideal condition intercept, but the current min is 95m and at 95m it still doesnt hit directly, it just misses close enough to still explode. That’s ridiculous. Even just half that would be a lot more reasonable.
THATS the biggest issue with multipaths current implementation. Beyond the fact that its a get out of jail free card for idiots who refuse to learn radar missile combat, or just players abusing game mechanics, even if the target is at an alt where they might get hit if they dont maneuver, its unlikely they’ll get hit if they do maneuver. IDK about you guys, but myself and my friends have all had many wacky misses at low-ish altitudes where the missile just didnt really seem to track properly and just sailed by the target instead? I had this argument with K_Stepanovich as well, my bug report was using IDEAL conditions. a Mach 1 target flying completely straight at a set altitude, and the missile could not even get close enough to proxy until above 95m. Thats BAD. Maneuvering targets make it so much worse.
3 Likes
I think it should be less than 95m, but currently even if we reduce it to 33m, it might still not be enough. Currently people have this option enabled shown in the screenshot. This prevents people from crashing into the ground if they make a mistake such as accidentally pitching nose down to avoid a missile.
1 Like
Both radars used on the USS Stark are over a decade older than the AIM-7M’s entry into service.
The AN/SPS-49 air search radar was first tested back in 1965 and entered service in 1975. The AN-SPS-55 surface search radar entered service in 1971.
RIM-7M entered service in 1983 and had specific design features to aid it in low altitude operations.
Despite this, like I previously stated, 5m is likely an idealized condition, which is what WT USUALLY models things as. Weapons systems and sensors fail irl, all the time. 2 sea skimming missile hits on an frigate isnt exactly a smoking gun.
1 Like
I dont mind if thats the tradeoff those players take, if they restrict their own controls to continue abusing a mechanic, its atleast a penalty, unlike the current state of low alt flying which is just easy mode free win
1 Like
7 Likes
I see you didnt add the third part “Amount of time gaijin actually listens” because it never fking happens
6 Likes
Multipath propagation is currently not properly modeled ingame.
Missiles going for the ground when aircraft fly at below 50m is due to ground noise absorption, where aircraft fly so low they are swallowed by the ground noise and the seeker of the missile can’t distinguish them and the ground. The AIM-7M is still susceptible for ground noise absorption and this is an issue for even very modern missiles today.
The reason this is that way is that pilots IRL almost never fly this close to the ground, only the based and redpilled Israeli pilots do.
3 Likes