How true to reality is DCS' Aim-120c?

[XIII]

So for the start, I get little knowledge about modern A2A combat. Im aware I might be all wrong, buts that what Im asking^^


I was knew that launch altitude, angle and target attitude was a big deal for "true" missile range, rather than the seemingly random 100-300 km range numbers. Thats after all why air superiority planes are still a thing.
But playing DCS, it feels like an Aim-120 cant do almost nothing on its own, as long as its not in a near perfect scenario.

Cant say exact numbers, but IIRC ive had Mig-29s fly away from me at mach 0.9. and a realiable hit-range was like 9 miles. Even in frontal engagement I often dont get a good indicator beyond 20 miles. That hardly even feels like BVR, and is probably far into the range of modern IRST sensors (imagine using your own radar in 2022).
Ive tried shots at ranges to test the accuracy of the indicator, but those Aim-120s indeed often got dodged.

At least thats my general experience anjd impression. Aim-120s, apparently the best BVR missiles in the game, seem to have surprisingly little effective range. Like maybe 2-3 times as much as a Sidewinder-X?
Is this realistic, DCS being bonkers or am I doing something wrong?

[james7347]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

The thing is, It will never be 1:1. It is impossible. But it is as close to realism as possible.

That is spot on.

I imagine one day computers will be so powerful that every aspect of real life will be reproduced.

[XIII]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

The thing is, It will never be 1:1. It is impossible. But it is as close to realism as possible.

I mean, if its even semi-close to reality, then thats all what I was curious about. In that case, consider my mind blown and most people in internet forum stupid xD

To give an understanding how an Aim-120 style missile works, it doesnt really matter if its effective range is 20 or 30 miles. To me its already surprising the range is that low.

We couldve used "generic (semi)modern BVR missile" for what Ive been asking, it didnt even need to be the Aim120^^

[james7347]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

The thing is, It will never be 1:1. It is impossible. But it is as close to realism as possible.

I think Troll Norris makes the point perfectly. Its as close as we can get at the present moment and that is dam good. Been a good debate this thread very enjoyable. Merry Christmas to you both and have a great new year 07

[XIII]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

The thing is, It will never be 1:1. It is impossible. But it is as close to realism as possible.

Originally posted by james7347:

I think Troll Norris makes the point perfectly. Its as close as we can get at the present moment and that is dam good. Been a good debate this thread very enjoyable. Merry Christmas to you both and have a great new year 07

Tbh my post was way too long-winded, compared to how basic the actualy question was (besides asking if we got special knowledge/examples). I need to get better at getting more precise in writing/reading in english.
But the question got answered, and dang, thats a lot to think about. Super interesting, thank you.

Also merry christmas to you two!

[Gunfreak]

Originally posted by XIII:

So for the start, I get little knowledge about modern A2A combat. Im aware I might be all wrong, buts that what Im asking^^


I was knew that launch altitude, angle and target attitude was a big deal for "true" missile range, rather than the seemingly random 100-300 km range numbers. Thats after all why air superiority planes are still a thing.
But playing DCS, it feels like an Aim-120 cant do almost nothing on its own, as long as its not in a near perfect scenario.

Cant say exact numbers, but IIRC ive had Mig-29s fly away from me at mach 0.9. and a realiable hit-range was like 9 miles. Even in frontal engagement I often dont get a good indicator beyond 20 miles. That hardly even feels like BVR, and is probably far into the range of modern IRST sensors (imagine using your own radar in 2022).
Ive tried shots at ranges to test the accuracy of the indicator, but those Aim-120s indeed often got dodged.

At least thats my general experience anjd impression. Aim-120s, apparently the best BVR missiles in the game, seem to have surprisingly little effective range. Like maybe 2-3 times as much as a Sidewinder-X?
Is this realistic, DCS being bonkers or am I doing something wrong?

Remember in DCS you fly planes with late 90s radars.

That limits the effects of the missles.

That said if you go at mach 1.2+ at 35k feet + you should be able to fire an effective 120C at around 35 nm. At least in the F16

https://youtu.be/eCDe62DNnyo

[XIII]

Originally posted by Gunfreak:

Remember in DCS you fly planes with late 90s radars.

That limits the effects of the missles.

Tbh, I never felt like radar was a problem. I could lock enemies far past the maximum missile range in every case.

Ofc better avionics probably improve range and kill chance of more modern missiles. Aim-120D exist, and Meteor/PL15/Aim-260 seem like answers to the limited range.

Tho Ill say the Aim-120 was way better on close distance than I expected. If the sidewinder didnt have off-bore, I mightve gone for aim-only in many configs.

That said if you go at mach 1.2+ at 35k feet + you should be able to fire an effective 120C at around 35 nm. At least in the F16

https://youtu.be/eCDe62DNnyo

Thx! So I suppose thats closer to the max range at altitude+speed, at least assuming your opponent isnt reacting quickly.

I would like to try more high altitude BVR, but I feel like neither the F16, nor the F18 really enjoy being that high^^
Gonna be interesting to how the F15-E, even if its the strike variant, and the Eurofighter throw missiles.

Maybe I should check the MAC F-15C; IIRC their missiles got some updates too a while ago.

[bignewy]

Originally posted by XIII:

So for the start, I get little knowledge about modern A2A combat. Im aware I might be all wrong, buts that what Im asking^^


I was knew that launch altitude, angle and target attitude was a big deal for "true" missile range, rather than the seemingly random 100-300 km range numbers. Thats after all why air superiority planes are still a thing.
But playing DCS, it feels like an Aim-120 cant do almost nothing on its own, as long as its not in a near perfect scenario.

Cant say exact numbers, but IIRC ive had Mig-29s fly away from me at mach 0.9. and a realiable hit-range was like 9 miles. Even in frontal engagement I often dont get a good indicator beyond 20 miles. That hardly even feels like BVR, and is probably far into the range of modern IRST sensors (imagine using your own radar in 2022).
Ive tried shots at ranges to test the accuracy of the indicator, but those Aim-120s indeed often got dodged.

At least thats my general experience anjd impression. Aim-120s, apparently the best BVR missiles in the game, seem to have surprisingly little effective range. Like maybe 2-3 times as much as a Sidewinder-X?
Is this realistic, DCS being bonkers or am I doing something wrong?

We use the best available public data, if you think you have better public data than we do feel free to PM me

thanks

[XIII]

Originally posted by bignewy:

We use the best available public data, if you think you have better public data than we do feel free to PM me

thanks

Damn, sometimes Im really bad at writing precise and easy to understand posts, am I? xD

I was mostly just asking how accurate to reality DCS is in regards to those missiles. Because it seems to contradict some things I thought and a lot of "public forum consensus stuff". Theres is also criticisms about Aim120s being underpowered from a while ago (many before the F-18 release), so I wasnt aware how much worked out the current model is.

And apparently DCS is quite accurate and heavily tuned, at least as much as it is possible, so it actually changes a lot of my understanding of BVR combat. At least with Aim-120Cs, but its not like physics magically change.

[Troll Norris]

Everyone from community wants DCS:W as realistic as possible. Even the devs. I think they must have passion for it. This is not something for "programmer mercenaries". Unlike in other genres, in simulator like this the very expensive research is made.

[XIII]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Everyone from community wants DCS:W as realistic as possible. Even the devs. I think they must have passion for it. This is not something for "programmer mercenaries". Unlike in other genres, in simulator like this the very expensive research is made.

I'd like to think so, I love passion projects like that^^

DCS has been a real learning experience to me. Learning to understand how the aircraft work, their weird quirks, systems logic and so on is kinda fascinating to me. In the real aircraft cockpit, everything is there for a reason, and learning about this stuff in a sim is almost like youre being told a bit of history. Flying the F16 kinda gave me a new understanding for the aircraft, and the BVR-missiles changed some of my ideas of A2A combat in the missile age.

Thats kinda why I made this thread to do a double check if this BVR stuff is real (or as real as the dev can make it).