It's time for Gaijin to finally reverse the ahistorical nerf to BOL countermeasures [Poll]

With the Leviathans Update introducing Imaging Infrared (IIR) anti-aircraft missiles in the form of IRIS-T and AIM-9X it is time for the Gaijin to revert the ahistorical nerfs that they made to BOL countermeasures and restore their effectiveness to at least pre-nerf levels.

Should the effectiveness of BOL countermeasures be increased?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Wait what on earth are BOL countermeasures?

BOL is a type of countermeasures (chaff / flare) dispenser which fits into the rear of a missile launch rail, allowing a large number of countermeasures to be carried in space that would otherwise go unused. The countermeasures are stored as flat packets on a belt inside the launcher, allowing 160 countermeasures to be carried per launcher. Imagine a loaf of sliced bread on a conveyor belt and each time the belt moves one slice falls off the end, that’s basically how BOL works, only with chaff / IR decoys instead of slices of bread.

Spoiler


image
image

BOL countermeasures are used on many aircraft in game, including the Harrier, Tornado, Gripen, Eurofighter, and some versions of the F-18.

So what did Gaijin do to them?

BOL was originally introduced with the same performance as normal countermeasures but in update 25.01.2024 Gaijin massively reduced the effectiveness of BOL countermeasures (seemingly prompted by how well the Gripen was performing at the time). This graph shows the effectiveness and duration of the different types of flares in game. It can be seen that the luminosity (how attractive the countermeasure is to missiles) of the BOL countermeasures was reduced by ~40% compared to standard countermeasures and the time they remain effective for after being fired was reduced by ~60%. BOL chaff was hit even worse, with it’s RCS reduced by a whopping 75% compared to normal chaff.

Spoiler

This double whammy of nerfs has massively reduced the effectiveness of BOL countermeasures, and made aircraft which rely on them for the bulk of their countermeasures (for example the Tornado F.3) increasingly hard to play as newer and newer missiles have been added over the last year.

What makes the nerf ahistorical?

Gaijin’s stated reason for making this change is that BOL countermeasures are physically lighter than most other countermeasures, so should be less effective. While it is true that BOL countermeasures are lighter than traditional countermeasures it is not at all correct to conclude that this makes them less effective. Let’s look at this in more detail.

BOL Chaff

BOL chaff consists of a lightweight plastic frame with packets of chaff within it, the frame is ejected from the BOL launcher, and the airflow then breaks the packets open dispersing the chaff.
image

In game standard chaff is based on the Russian 26 mm chaff cartridge, which has a mass of 55 g, meanwhile the BOL packet has a total mass of 45 g.

Spoiler

Chemring BOL Datasheet:
image

Chemring 26 mm Chaff datasheet (Fit-Form-Function replacement for out of production PPR-26 chaff cartridges)
image

So it is true that a BOL chaff packet is lighter than a normal chaff cartridge, however the difference in mass is only 18%, which clearly does not justify a 75% decrease in RCS. However this is simply comparing the total mass of the BOL packet and the chaff cartridge, lets see what happens if we compare the actual volume of chaff within each.

A BOL chaff packet is 71.8 mm x 85.5 mm x 11.3 mm, pixel measuring that gives us a block of chaff that is roughly 60.0 x 68.2 x 10.0 mm or 40,920 mm3. By comparison a 26 mm chaff cartridge is 26 mm in diameter and 86 mm long. If we are very generous and assume that 10 mm of that total length is lost to the base plate, the end cap (that stops chaff falling out), and other stuff like the plunger that forces the chaff out then we get a maximum possible chaff cylinder of 26 mm x 76 mm, which equates to 40,350 mm3 of chaff (and that is a generous estimate).

So we can see that a BOL chaff packet likely contains no less chaff than a typical chaff cartridge.

Spoiler

image

That’s not all though. Due to it’s placement inside a missile launch rail BOL chaff is typically carried in the wing (where traditional chaff is carried in fuselage dispensers on most aircraft). In their brochure SAAB explicitly note that being mounted on the wing, significantly increases BOL’s RCS compared to traditional chaff, due to the vortices near the wing tip helping the chaff rapidly bloom. In addition air scoops on the back of the the launcher further increase this effect. So not only is BOL chaff no smaller than conventional chaff it is more effective too!

Spoiler

image
image
image

BOL IR

BOL IR is a tad more complicated than the chaff. BOL IR is not actually a flare in the traditional sense it is a pyrophoric spatial IR decoy. A pyrophoric material is sealed within a plastic packet, when the packet is ejected it breaks apart and the material is released into a cloud, much like chaff. The material then reacts with the air, rapidly oxidising and producing an intense cloud of infrared radiation. It should be noted that BOL IR is near invisible to the naked eye as nearly all of its energy is concentrated in the IR spectrum (unlike conventional flares which waste some energy producing visible light).

image

This mechanism actually makes BOL IR more effective than conventional flares against IIR missiles. The Spatial nature of the decoy makes it appear as a similar in size to the aircraft, rather than as a single hot point that the seeker can easily identify and ignore. Here is an example of BOL IR viewed through a thermal camera:

Spoiler

In addition spatial decoys like BOL IR can entirely block an IIR missile’s view of a target in the rear aspect, allowing the target to escape while the missile is blinded. This effect can be seen in these images:

Spoiler


image

Conclusion

Gaijin’s nerf to BOL countermeasures is not historically accurate and for over a year this change has had a major detrimental impact on a wide range of aircraft which rely primarily on BOL for self-defence. With the arrival of missiles featuring IIR seekers, which BOL IR was specifically designed to defeat, it is time for Gaijin to reverse the nerf they made to BOL. In real life BOL countermeasures are just as effective, if not more so, than traditional countermeasures, so should be returned to being at least as good as normal countermeasures in game.

111 Likes

There is no reason for them to not do this.

14 Likes

With the addition of new SPAAs and Fox 3’s this would be very nice to the survivability of a lot of planes for which some of them are on the lower end of the top tier range but still face it

there really is no reason why this nerf has stayed.

if anything it’s made my favourite jets several times more challenging to play as they themselves have an already too extreme IR signature.

12 Likes

With very very hot aircraft like the Harriers and Tomcats I see no reason why they would keep BOL flares like this. Make it more effective than large calibre flares but keep the short burn time

18 Likes

harrier needs it the most as it cant just turn off reheat to avoid a lot of the issue.

its crazy that the front nozzles are even producing heat, its air coming out the compressor before fuel is added into the turbine its not been heated much at all, no hotter than how air increases in temp when going through a turbocharger but on a bigger scale

6 Likes

Bump 🙌

9 Likes

Would very much like to see this implemented. The aircraft that carry these shouldn’t be nerfed for intuition when many other relatively rare features are interpreted correctly.

IMO until their pyrophoric nature can be modelled they should be reclassified as large calibre.

1 Like

It is time for BOL to return

8 Likes

The whole modelling of heat signatures really needs a revisit. Having it based only on thrust (as it is now) sounds like a good enough solution at first glance, but in practice it causes all sorts of problems.

22 Likes

sounds good for a game until you get to things like a harrier.

what confuses me is how the hell is the F5 so cold to the point that IR missiles don’t work often on it

Yeah, made sense when you were talking about Aim-9Bs but IRIS-T SLM?

Just seems insane that its not even slightly more advanced by now

(though the fuel dumping thingy having an IR signature does present hope that more advanced IR sigs are being worked upon)

3 Likes

Because IR signature is entirely dependent on thrust and F-5 produces very little thrust (compared to other aircraft) presumably.

8 Likes

shame it isnt thrust to weight as it would be screwed.

I hate the F5. it makes high tier air unplayable

Couple extra pics:

F-14 IR countermeasure use as seen in NVG:

BOL IR (most likely):


Traditional flare (likely Mk46/MJU-8B/MJU-27/SM875):

The standard flare visually has a significantly smaller IR signature compared to the BOL IR deployment

The figure 19 actually looks exactly like this picture from behind an F-14:

For those wondering where I got these pics, they’re screenshots from this video (link to just before we start seeing good frames of the CM deployments):

9 Likes

no we dont need planes staying op right after getting good spaa finally
you can have your bol countermeasures after s400 and patriot

4 Likes

I agree that BOL nerf should be reversed

but at the same time all planes that could carry BOL should receive it as many are currently missing BOL despite evidence showing that it could be used

14 Likes

160% on board

Adding BOL to F-15A/C/E and F/A-18C would be great too

9 Likes

You seem to be ignoring the fact that air battles exist and aircraft like the Tornado F.3 really struggle as a result of the BOL nerf.

Also if you think aircraft having up to 640 BOL chaff is a problem (though many only get 320), then just wait until you find out how much large chaff the Tornado gets…

23 Likes

If this change would help planes get more appropriate amounts of chaff and flares, I think its fair game to undo it with the ridiculous amount of missiles available.

4 Likes