Видео

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.

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.

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?

I'd be glad to hear some of the points if you don't mind sharing. Also, I do hear a lot of people share some wild stories about notching. But I only wanted to cover the things that I could personally recreate. And I fired a ton of missiles to make sure none of those were a fluke. But if you have more to share I definitely want to hear it.

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom I genuinely think there's a lot to learn from this and your other videos. They are very good for introductory knowledge as that is the aim. I just think there are some elements, that many others also never mention, such as taking into account how repeatable things are in DCS since it's a game. How things are programmed very binary at time. Notching is extremely easy, almost comically so. Things can obviously change, and I prefer your method of attempting to make a more or less timeless piece. I just thought the title of this video in particular struck me the wrong way with the information you provided.

Awesome. I have never tried it. But glad to hear it works there too.

You can do it 100% of the time. Just gotta practice also pretty sure you can do it a little higher too.

@@freakmusicaddict nothing is ever 100%, especially inside ed code

@@BMD8 Na that is just a skill issue, at close range it is just a very small time window. The only thing that could happen is you get a desynced missile but that is online only.

I think you've highlighted an interesting difference between people playing a game and real world combat pilots: a 10% chance to die is a terrifyingly high chance of dying. The F-105 suffered such high losses in Vietnam that it was phased out in favor of the F-4. What was that attrition rate? Less than 2%.

@@wmouse yea in DCS you can practice notching with the same parameters every time unlike in the real world where the parameters are not necessarily known or can be simulated close enough.

@@chihirobelmoable I bet you could also defeat missile reliable in BMS with notching but because only extreme larpers play that game they don't do it.

@@freakmusicaddictI play BMS because DCS is hot dogshit

@@freakmusicaddict you can but still not like in DCS...in BMS I remember I could notch defeat ARH if you completely make relative closure velocity almost 0 like making the plane stall vertically.

Is that a pun?😂😂

Okay that was a good pun.

Notching a fox 3 before it goes pitbull/active would be kind pointless I would think.

In dcs it's incredibly easy to notch a fox 3 missile and that's what you should be doing. There is specific type of bvr fight called notch fighting. Since notching in dcs is is a 100% tactic(if the miasile is in the notch window it will 100% get notched) the ranges of the fight can get up to 2-3 miles close if both fighters are experienced.

That was my exact thinking. If I put a fox3 on my 9 o clock and not the firing jet I should be able to notch it. Of course the closer the missile the harder to get the right notching angle? Can someone clarify?

Yeah absolutely. It can work. But it can also fail. So you always take a risk when trying a notch. I've always viewed a notch defense as something you would use when there's no other choice. My preference is to follow the guidance I've talked about in the rest of the BVR series and work a plan that keeps you outside the enemy's effective range.

It's the missile's ability to see the target that's relevant to a kill, so yes, notching the missile is what you need to do for a pitbull Fox 3. It should also work for a Fox 1 or a non-terminal Fox 3, but since a Fox 1 isn't emitting anything itself, you'd have to identify the missile visually to notch it, so notching the illuminator is the better bet in general. In principle, the illuminating radar could be steered by another sensor, though. In this case, the illuminating radar itself wouldn't see you, but as long as the other sensor kept it pointed to illuminate the target, the missile would still pick up the reflections, and they'd have a different doppler shift than the ground clutter if you didn't have the missile notched, so you'd have to notch the missile. I'm not sure if any aircraft (especially those likely to be limited to Fox 1's) have this capability, however.

Awesome. Glad you liked it.

While I'm not sure how well a microwave oven might simulate a real radar, I do know magnetrons (like what power a microwave oven) have been used in war time as decoys. In 1999's Operation Allied Force in Kosovo and Serbia, the Serbs did use improvised decoy emitters fairly extensively to draw in the aircraft that were suppressing air defenses. While we won't know exactly how effective they were we do know a lot of the Serbian air defenses survived the war. So they did something right. A simple magnetron set up correctly can look just like a radar to a distant sensor.

Personally, I went through a recruiter to join. My job was programming. So my experience may not help with becoming a fighter pilot. But I do know that getting a slot is very competitive. It helps to go to the Academy or through a Guard unit that can guarantee you a slot. Just remember there are a lot of others that want those slots. So you will need to look better than them on your application.

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyomthx man for the tuts and info