Video

There will definitely be more in the Air Supremacy series. Also, I will be doing a dedicated air-to-ground track as well. There's a lot more in store for this channel. I hope you are enjoying the videos.

Holy moly, was i wrooooooooong...i did 4 tests, 2x direct shot / 2x curved between 20 and 30 degrees pitch with R27ER. Direct shot alt 7943 m dstnc 45,3 km mach 1,15 initial g pulled 1,4g (how much missile pulled during boost max g to aim at target) ... impact time 53,27s mach 0,89 Curved shot 27,6 dgrs pitch alt 8081 m dstnc 43,8 km mach 1,07 initial g pulled 3,1g ... impact time 43,43s mach 1,55 The other attempt at 22 degrees did a little bit better.

We know that speed and G affect both turn rate and radius. AoA is linked to these. As you increase G (for a set speed) you also increase AoA. So there's going to be a maximum AoA for maximum turn rate. Now if you look at the E-M diagram on the upper left side it says "Max Lift". That's the airframe's lift limit. The point where you get the most lift from an airfoil is the critical AoA (after which you stall the airfoil). So that part of the E-M diagram is also going to be the highest AoA you can get while still turning. So hopefully that helps explain how AoA plays a part in your turn.

Feel free to do the translation and share it with your friends. Thanks for the positive comment.

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom Thanks Mike

Thanks, Yappy. I appreciate it.

Awesome. Glad you liked it.

My experience has been exactly the same. Sidewinders are way more reliable in the Phantom. In Real Life the Sparrows of this era were designed for intercepting big bombers. This seems to be reflected in DCS where they are much more reliable against larger targets. It wasn't until much later that their performance against fighter sized targets improved.

I'm glad it's helpful. I really appreciate the feedback.

The issue lies in DCS’s radar simulation being inaccurate allowing for the notch to be overly effective

@@benson4820 Do you know the numbers to make that claim? Because I dont think you can go around saying that without knowing the doppler notch filter values of the radards you are talking about. Just as an example lets take an airborne radar and a missile radar that we think we know the values of pretty well. The doppler notch filter of an aim 120b is (or at least we think it is) 90 knots - basend on publically accessible data. Lets take an airborne radar too, the doppler notch filter of an f14 radar is about 200 knots. These are quite high values. if you are flying a good speed for missile fighting within the mar (450 to 600 knots in the f16), you can be as much as 8.6° deviated from a perfect curved perpenticular flight path before the missile can not distinguish you from ground clutter due to a doppler filter. In DCS, missile notching usually requires a perfect 90° or 89.x° curved flight path, something well beyond IRL functionality. Mike is actually kind of dumb, in not figuring out, that the reason why he saw people outside of 10 degrees to left or right, was because the targets werent flying a curved path, therefore were not perpenticular, therefore because of the angle of their flight vector, their closure speed eventually exceeded the notch filter of each radar he tested. You can also derive that the notch filters are custom modeled for each airframe, because the angle necessary for someone to be out of notch, is different for each radar. (Angle representing closure, as a result of the travel vector deviation from perpenticular to the radar). It is safe to assume, that until aesa radars, most missiles and radards have a notch filter between 100 and 200 knots. Rarely does it go lower than that with a single antenna array. This is perfectly well modelled. Its hard to hit things flying at near mach 1, when you can only track them with radar, near background clutter. We do not know whether missiles can decrease their notch filter setting, in hope of tracking targets they otherwise couldnt. Probably not, with 90s missiles.

We do have some longer range missiles represented in DCS. The F-14's Phoenix and the MiG-31's R-33/AA-9. Real world those both have extreme ranges. So those might be good to train against if you want to see what it might be like.

Yes actually. Flying straight down at the ground will do it. However, you can only do that for so long. 😃

Good to know :) Is a vertical notch followed by either cover if there is any or by a low level horizontal notch going cold a sound strategy or is simply a long U-turn preferable?

This is it exactly.

Lift that is pointing backwards, relative to the direction of flight, IS one of the components of drag. Angle of attack for example causes it to tilt backwards.

@@cmptohocah The backwards component of the total reaction is drag, and the other is lift. Lift and drag are perpendicular, but yes the total reaction is pointing slightly backwards. Lift and Drag are defined like this, because Lift becomes unable to add/remove energy (does not affect your speed), while Drag can only slow you down, it can't make you change direction like lift does. Now this means that stuff like the Lift/Drag ratio equal your glide ratio, among other very useful things. Look at the wikipedia page for Lift-to-drag ratio, and the image on the right side.

@@silience4095 I am not 100% sure what you are trying to say here, but all I wanted to point out to you is that when the lift vector, produced by the lift surface(s), is tilted the component of the lift that is acting in the same direction as the drag, becomes a part of the drag. That is one of the reasons you need to add power in a level turn, 'cause extra lift you need to produce in order to stay level is also increasing the total drag force.

@@cmptohocah It's just a terminology thing. Lift is always perpendicular to the relative airflow at infinity. Drag is always parallel to the relative airflow at infinity. Lift doesn't tilt back, because it's defined that way, it's more useful if it doesn't. What does tilt back is the total reaction, or total aerodynamic force.

Yeah, I mentioned this in the pinned comment. During the making of the video there were some patches that shifted the window slightly. I'd already changed things twice and it was minor enough that I felt a comment would cover it. Hopefully that helps.

That's a great point. Thanks for sharing.

Essentially, thats the basic idea.

While that's how DCS treats it, it's not how western radars IRL would. Remember, radar doppler filtering is just that, a filter applied after receiving a return. IRL, things like range gating, signal strength analysis, and rate tracking all defeat this tactic. With missiles, the INS is going to guide to the last computed intercept point when it loses lock... especially true with range gating where it ignores things like ground clutter outside the range bin the target is in.

@@Whiskey11Gaming Thank you, this is excellent information.

So what happens is a little more complicated but you have the jist. Essentially notching only works if your in a situation where clutter returns fall into the radars speed gate (which is very narrow often 15-30kts wide) and are intense enough to overpower the targets return. And as such you cannot notch in lookup situations especially at high altitude.

@@nighthawk2174 Thanks ++ So the radar speed gate is like a filter to remove slow moving objects and to reduce noise? Its width having "zero" absolute kts in the middle? The intensity being a result of losses that basically increase w distance? and in a lookup situation there are also less return surfaces making the target very distinguishable. Am I understanding it correct that the main issue was(/is) return signal processing and not (absent/inadequate) modulation schemes to identify them?

Only if speeds are exactly matched so the second plane stays at the same distance

The notch by definition has non-zero closure except at the 3:00 and 9:00 position wrt the transmitting aircraft. So aircraft remaining in the notch will be closing or opening range unless near those positions. Anytime the range is staying the same, they're in the zero super Doppler condition. Except at the 3/9 positions, zero Doppler and notch conditions do not line up.

@@idahlke1 notching at 90 degrees only works because radar can't distinguish target from chaff

I don't think so, because both aircraft are moving with their own velocities. So the target is still moving relative to what the radar sees as the ground, thus allowing it to see the notching aircraft. It works nose on because your relative velocity to the radar is the same as the grounds velocity to the radar. Any difference between those two figures will make you visible

@@Generic_Name_1-1 The radar isnt looking for movement relative to the enviroment, it's looking for the dopler effect. The whole reason notching works is because you trick the radar into filtering you out because your relative speed is low enough that it thinks you're the ground.

@@Nevan_Nedall that's literally what I said. And yes, in effect it is looking for relative velocity to the ground. Because the doppler gate is calibrated to the ground so it can filter the return out. If you aren't presenting the same relative velocity to the radar as the ground you will be visible to the radar

@@Generic_Name_1-1 From what I understand there is a theoretical notch circle where your relative velocity to the radar will be minimal. Mike just had the targets fly in a straight line, hence why they entered-exited the notch.

@@cmptohocah that would work if you were stationary, but since the target aircraft is also moving even if the radar signal is on the 3-9 line because you're off axis to the nose of the radar aircraft, the radar will still see you. Like I said both aircraft still have velocities, unless you're flying cold with the radar notched you're neither the same velocity to the ground or the same velocity as the radar itself.

You are correct that theoretically it is possible. However, we're talking about semi-active radar homing missiles at that point of the video. Those missiles require a narrow beam of energy to illuminate the target. Wide beams run the risk of illuminating something else in the air and sending the missile off course. With that requirement you need the launching aircraft to maintain a good lock. How do you maintain a lock on the target if the target has faded? You don't. So the launching aircraft can't accurately guide a semi-active missile that it can't see. But I suppose if you want to go to an extreme you can say that some random radar waves could hit the target and that would be enough. However, I've never heard of this happening in DCS or from any of the real life fighter pilots I've worked with.

So as far as illuminating the target without having a good lock, I believe most of the gen 4 aircraft in DCS actually do this. The mirage 2000 has a memory mode for the last known trajectory, that can both illuminate a target for the s530d, and regain the lock if the target fails to maintain the notch. The f-18 also has a memory mode which is programmable, to attempt to regain lock after missing multiple sweeps of the radar. I'm also pretty sure both can force illuminate a cone in front of them, in special cases where either a lock is lost, or difficult to acquire. This would be your illumination through "other sensor", the sensor being your mk1 eyeball. I'm not sure if any of the IRST planes in DCS can direct the radar and it's beam without also having a radar lock. I feel like that's a feature that should be there.

​@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom So Jon is right the missile could still hit even if the host radar loses track so long as it's still emitting guidance signals that are reflecting off the target. The missile gets continues to track via its own internal speed gate which is fully independent of the host radars tracking loops. If the speed gate was already established on the target whether or not the host radar is tracking is irrelevant. So long as CWFM/CWI signals are still being emitted the missile will not lose lock. And, so long as it doesn't lose the targets doppler in the near 0 doppler clutter relative to the missile. To go off course in the case of another target said target would need to be in the missiles main beam, in the host radars CW/CWI beam, and close enough in doppler to impact the speed gate, and have a strong return, and to not be filtered out by ECCM (in such a situation I could see a new signal in the filters tripping ECCM logic). Speed gates are generally 15-30 knots wide in total. With the return strength entering the speed gate falling off exponentially as you approach that +- 7.5-15kts. This is a possibility in DCS right now, but it's really only fully modeled on the M2K and F4.

Second-time-around returns. It's a thing.

@@ethanmckinney203 What, specifically, are you referring to? Creeping wave returns to the illuminating radar? Multipath effects when over a flat ground plane?

" instinctive beaming split-S is guaranteed to save you if it was launched at a BVR distance." I have to disagree on one thing, because it's not true anymore, someone who flies into a Fox3 unsuspectingly and the missle arrives with good energy 2-3mach it's almost impossible for the target to escape this missle. and i'm talking about 40-60nm shots here. when the target is over 20-30,000 feet and gets a warning it becomes critical if it's not prepared and I'm talking about PVP experience "ED's justification is that the missile requires 8-10 seconds of active radar illumination to home in on the target, however this doesn't match what is publically said about American ARH missiles (that the target has less than a second of warning)" could you give me the names of the public docs so that I can read them?