Things like this should not be happening at top tier
This is just about as ideal of a condition any low alt threat could present. Large target (F-14B), above Mach 1, head-on shot, 70m above the AIM-7M’s stated min altitude with little to no clutter behind the target, and the missile missed by over 30m. I’m using the 7M here as its one of the only pics I have readily available, but this extends to other more modern radar missiles we have in-game.
The R-27ER, the Skyflash variants, the 54C, none are a threat at this altitude, I dont need to maneuver, I dont need to chaff, I could even be AFK and reliably dodge these missiles by just abusing the absurd level of multipath currently modelled.
Hers an AIM-54C missing the target at 82m altitude. Non-maneuvering, no chaff, high speed. Theres CLEARLY something that has to be done with this.
So like I said, beam aspect tracking, although clearly comparatively wrong between the 54A and 54C, is nowhere near the primary issue. The modelling of multipath as currently seen in-game is much more serious an issue and affects all radar missiles, while the 54C more specifically has major issues in its maneuverability (17g instead of 25g, 32% nerf, and allegedly intentional according to a mod) and the visibility (lacking smokeless motor and massive RCS making missile launches visible on radar from absurd distances).
Second “smokeless” doesnt ACTUALLY mean smokeless, its reduced smoke, or low visibility, its easier to just say smokeless and is relatively commonly referred to as such. This is a good diagram for said explanation:
Thirdly, even reduced smoke motors produce contrails at contrail altitudes, they’re just not as pronounced or visible. Here’s a “smokeless” AMRAAM launch at high alt for example:
This was all previously discussed way back when the 54C first came into a dev server and was forwarded to the devs:
but as usual, it has gone unfixed despite them LITERALLY just adding “smokeless” motors ingame
You can even tell the motor isnt producing thick smoke as its actually more translucent than opaque
I doubt that that is actually an AIM-9M. That channel has re-uploaded a Danish military video and the smoke trail looks far more consistent with what the official Danish Air Force channel label as AIM-9L firings. Come to mention it I can’t even find anything proving the Danish actually used the AIM-9M.
Compare that to an AIM-9X (which has a truly “smokeless” motor - and is similar to the AIM-9M):
Reduced smoke is not the same as “smokeless”. Compare the amount of smoke coming out the AIM-54C at altitude to the virtually invisible smoke coming out of the AIM-9X and ASRAAM when fired at altitude. I’d describe those two as being essentially “smokeless”, whereas the AIM-54C is just reduced smoke.
AIM-9L received the reduced smoke motor as well, and as older motors met their shelf life they were replaced with the newer reduced smoke Mk36… Whichever “mod” that is I can’t recall at the moment.
Also worth noting Stepanovich was having productive discussion about the issues you’re heckling about and you disrupted the discussion… possibly even preventing some of this from getting fixed in the first place since they were unable to convince him of their reasoning / logic.
I have a question about multipath propagation and its relation to the missile trajectory angle.
In the left image, the missile is flying at the target from the front and same altitude. There will be a return that comes directly from the target and another return that is the target’s return reflected from the ground forming an image underground. The missile will then fly at the averaged return (point on the ground directly under the target).
In the right image, the missile is flying at the target from the front but from a much higher altitude. The image is now closer to the target and increases the chances of hitting the true target (given a sufficiently large angle from the ground).
Is my logic sound for the second image? Is this how it works in the game? Does the illuminating radar position matter here?
I have tried using this tactic to ensure a higher chance of killing targets skimming the surface, but the missile seems to still often land far ahead of the target. I don’t know if it is my perception of angles (maybe I thought the missile was much closer to the normal than I thought) or if it is not how it works IRL/in-game
Logic is sound and thats how you can score SARH hits against low flying targets, but you need to be almost directly on top. Basically airframe needs to find itself on path towards distorted lock point or at least close enough for proximity fuse to set off
