安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
From what I have read, it seems that it was a fairly expensive and somewhat difficult to maintain weapon system. It does not help that its primary mission (to kill strike or bomber aircraft before they could launch their weapons at a fleet) was not as big a issue after the end of the Cold war.
On top of that, the AIM-120 has progressed to a point where it essentially can do a similar role while being lighter, easier to maintain, and is generally more reliable.
As far as dodging the missile goes, I think you may want to start hitting the figurative books on this one and read up on actual missile evasion technique in general. A good place to start is this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-i4eZWD-Nw
This video will explain how to essentially force a missile to run out of energy as it tries to intercept you. It is kinda like dodging a SAM in the A-10C, you want to put the missile on either your 3 or 9 o clock and in doing so, you force it to expend more energy as it tries to lead you. In this case, you are not quite putting it on your 3 or 9 but instead perhaps on your 2 and 10.
Hopefully this helps.
Look for paragraph with name : "Terminator Vision: How does a Pulse Doppler Radar see the world?" - it is universal for all aircrafts. It is in the middle of page.
In all fairness I'm probably not notching correctly, I should be able to get radar invisible. I'll certainly give this a go; I will try notching as soon as the missile is fired. I also thought it was best to wait until the missile was fairly close before dumping chaff, this guy seems to dump chaff early. Might be worth getting tac-view so I can better review whats happening.
I would make the point however that the guy in the video defeats a MATRA, an AIM-120 & R-27ER. The first I havn't tried against, the latter 2 I can defeat easily at long range.
The problem with draining the missiles energy is that it doesn't work with this type of missile. watch my replay and tell me what you think im doing wrong:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1uuo6mfhuljpsqs/f-14%20notch.trk?dl=0
Even better, try this mission and upload your results:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/164y7al9qy3bk5w/f-14%20gauntlet.miz?dl=0
and yes this is outside of your RMAX, there really is no answer for this one besides dumb luck or force multiplier. If you're testing in the editor set them to CAP because intercept they were only using AIM-9Ms. Providing tracks are useless as they mess up, you gotta provide a video/tacview recording.
The basic concept of notching (as the video does a good job exploring) is not about making the missile go "dead" because it can't find you. That specific thing only happened with the second missile launched at him and only because the launch was close enough that he could actually get outside the missile's detection cone and render it useless. It is that first missile that is launched at him that shows what notching actually is.
In the video, the guy puts himself in a situation where the enemy launches a missile at him. He immediately starts turning a bit so that he is still pushing towards the enemy plane while also forcing the enemy missile to keep burning energy in a attempt to maintain lead. This set of actions is the very definition of notching. The point is not to go "invisible" or anything. The point is to push the missile to burn all its energy trying to intercept you or it locks on to any countermeasures you are expending.
In your specific case, Perhaps it might be good to tell us the range in which the engagement starts. How far away are they and is this a situation where you can potentially approach from a better position?
Either way, it does not matter if we are talking about a AIM-54 or a R-27, they all have a finite amount of fuel to burn and if you are at a long enough range away, you can make even a AIM-54 burn all its energy so that it can't keep turning to intercept you. If this mission does not give you that room, it really is going to come down to a bit of luck until you can close the distance and engage them up-close.
Ok thanks for clearing that up, I was clearly getting confused with my terminology. I was refering to the various diagrams provided showing you how the plane looks from the radar perspective.
Your right that all missiles have finite energy, and the AIM-54 is possible to avoid, it's just alot harder than the other missiles. I'm going full afterburner in a shallow dive reaching speeds in excess of 1300 while going perpendicular (9/3 o'clock) from the moment the missile is launched at range of 80-100km (I think). And it's still an extremely dicey afair.
Sometimes the missile first appears as a label somewhat behind me (8/4 o'clock) in which case I will avoid the missile. I belive the missile has tracked me poorly in these situations, so has less energy. Other times it appears on 3/9 o'clock (good tracking = more energy) and im dead a few seconds later.
This missile litterally makes other missiles look like they are moving through water.
I think you should try the single mission I posted to see for yourself. I ussually take out the 1st plane (ussually), but I hav't managed all 4 yet. They spawn one at a time at 100km or so, so if your methods work there should be no excuse.
Has there been recently any modifications to the aim-54 model?
I agree with Boobstorm, that maybe the aim-54 model in DCS isn't as realistic as possible. I've seen a couple of articles saying that outmanouvering aim-54 should be a piece of cake, but in DCS I think it's really difficult. Even though I don't trust my own skills, but expert AI's seem to have trouble outmanouvering aim-54's as well.
I have a bit better survival rate flying below 5000m though.