missiles The AIM-54 Phoenix missile - Technology, History and Performance

[Flame2512 3,386]

3 hours ago, DSplayer said:

Yep, that was my bug report. You're gonna need like an actual manual describing the AIM-54 in detail before that happens. Basically it's not going to be possible.

But "An Outsider’s View Of The Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System, Stephen Thornton Long, Naval Postgraduate School, March 1977" does state that the warhead has an effective radius of 50 ft. That wording is a bit of a problem since it doesn't detail how close the fuse itself actually detonates at (which is something I think is pretty much impossible to find in any circumstance and probably varied from missile to missile irl depending on the missile shoot).

The page in question:

Hide contents

 

The same document also details the success of a test against a low flying target that was flying at an altitude of 50ft, something that is downright almost impossible to do in WT thanks to their modelling of radar against targets that are close to the ground.

 

Hide contents

 

 

Is that document online somewhere? I had a look before (long before the F-14 was announced), but couldn't find a copy anywhere.

[DSplayer 271]

9 minutes ago, Flame2512 said:

 

Is that document online somewhere? I had a look before (long before the F-14 was announced), but couldn't find a copy anywhere.

I have a redacted PDF copy that someone gave me when they went through and made a FOIA request. No one uploaded it online to the major PDF repos yet though.

Edited June 27, 2022 by DSplayer

[David Bowie 1,554]

23 hours ago, Flame2512 said:

Is that document online somewhere? I had a look before (long before the F-14 was announced), but couldn't find a copy anywhere.

An Outsiders view on the Phoenix AWG-9 Weapon System.pdf

[tripod2008 594]

15 hours ago, _David_Bowie_ said:

An Outsiders view on the Phoenix AWG-9 Weapon System.pdf 8.57 MB  ·  19 downloads

Ok, this is a pretty cool find, though looking at things I'm not sure that its the most recent revision of the document

 

The likely source of the 16G claims

Quote

In a test in December (1974) a drone [apparently a QF-86] pulled a 6g, 174 degree turn; four seconds after a Phoenix had been launched [from 9.5 nm; 17.5] at it in an attempt to break the radar lock of the missile and AWG-9 fire control system. The AIM-54A responded with a 16g maneuver and scored a lethal hit. (See Figure 10; PDF - page #45).

It'd be nice to see someone attempt to replicate (and, record) this, for usage, analysis and assistance with developing various bug reports relating to the AWG-9 and AIM-54, though without the use of WRTI, a steady hand and luck; replicating the "defensive maneuver" will likely be very difficult; the "Drone" in question was most likely either a converted ex-Japanese F-86F, or ex-USAF F-86H (which is still missing from the tech tree), and we're completely missing non aircraft based drones, so some sort of stand-in may be needed for the other tests.

 

 

The only other thing of note in the document is;

 

PDF Page- #85 covers the AN/ALR-23 IRST? (the earlier of the IRSTS's that the F-14 was equipt with (the latter being the AN/AAS-42 found on the F-14D); which for whatever reason the F-14A "Early" doesn't have access to even as a mod) [The excerpt is likely from NAVAIR 01F-14AAA-1A; dated June 1st, 1974; "Figure 8-204" according to the bibliography]

Quote

1. "Infrared search"; for infrared search and detection,
2. "Infrared track"; for infrared tracking and missile launch (Active off the rail, AIM-54; AIM-7[Illumination required, but no Radar Track needed as the IRST can be be used as a replacement], or AIM-9),
3. "Infrared slaved"; when the infrared is slaved to the radar line-of-sight to the target.

 

The nominal detection range for each of the modes for a low altitude fighter bomber (without afterburner) is 10 nautical miles [18.5km] in a nose aspect and 46 nautical miles [85km] in a tail aspect. For a high altitude supersonic interceptor the nominal detection range is 102 nautical miles [188km] in a nose aspect and 179 nautical miles [331km] in a tail aspect. The infrared capabilities are summarized in Table IX [PDF-Page #87; this also provide angular limitations for the various modes]. The infrared sensor's detectors are indium antimonide elements that can detect heat generated by exhaust in the 4-5 micron range. The detector array is cooled to operating temperature by the detector refrigerator, which is a 83 self-contained, closed-cycle Stirling cycle refrigerator

 

 

Edited June 29, 2022 by tripod2008

[DSplayer 271]

On 28/06/2022 at 14:56, tripod2008 said:

Ok, this is a pretty cool find, though looking at things I'm not sure that its the most recent revision of the document

The original document is a postgraduate thesis written in March of 1977. There wouldn't be an update.

 

 

On 28/06/2022 at 14:56, tripod2008 said:

The only other thing of note in the document is;

 

PDF Page- #85 covers the AN/ALR-23 IRST? (the earlier of the IRSTS's that the F-14 was equipt with (the latter being the AN/AAS-42 found on the F-14D); which for whatever reason the F-14A "Early" doesn't have access to even as a mod) [The excerpt is likely from NAVAIR 01F-14AAA-1A; dated June 1st, 1974; "Figure 8-204" according to the bibliography]

 

 

Well tbh the IRST would be kinda useless in WT in my opinion. Only a couple of the early F-14As received it and they found out it didn't perform up to par iirc so it was removed and a bullet fairing was put in place until the TCS system came out in numbers to replace it or the plane only got the ALQ-100 antenna and position light.

 

Spoiler

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by DSplayer

[Sky_King7 102]

On 22/06/2022 at 07:55, MythicPi said:

How about it @Smin1080p @k_stepanovich? Would we be able to provide calculations for the proximity fuse on the AIM-54A? It doesn't make much sense that the Phoenix has an explosive mass 6x that of a sparrow in-game, but the exact same proximity fuse...

 

If not, could we at least get an explanation as to why it was decided to give it a smaller proxy fuse than something like the R-23/24 while still having 3x the explosive mass? 

15meters for the AIM-54 makes sense considering volume of a sphere is r^3.
 

[MythicPi 593]

On 22/06/2022 at 08:55, MythicPi said:

How about it @Smin1080p @k_stepanovich? Would we be able to provide calculations for the proximity fuse on the AIM-54A? It doesn't make much sense that the Phoenix has an explosive mass 6x that of a sparrow in-game, but the exact same proximity fuse...

 

If not, could we at least get an explanation as to why it was decided to give it a smaller proxy fuse than something like the R-23/24 while still having 3x the explosive mass? 

@_David_Bowie_didn't get any feedback on this, any input on the subject? I know that unfortunately some info just can't be found with sources and it seems this situation is one of those cases...

[TimeFaker 237]

On 29/06/2022 at 05:56, tripod2008 said:

WRTI, a steady hand and luck; replicating the "defensive maneuver" will likely be very difficult; the "Drone" in question was most likely either a converted ex-Japanese F-86F, or ex-USAF F-86H (which is still missing from the tech tree), and we're completely missing non aircraft based drones, so some sort of stand-in may be needed for the other tests.

i have a joystick so i can try to do a 6G

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

Nice thread. Indirectly hypes me up for the MiG-31 as it has the R-33 which is very similar to the Phoenix in function

 

Do you have any complaints against the current implemenation of the AIM-54? I haven't carefully read the comments section. 

[nighthawk2174 80]

5 hours ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Nice thread. Indirectly hypes me up for the MiG-31 as it has the R-33 which is very similar to the Phoenix in function

 

Do you have any complaints against the current implemenation of the AIM-54? I haven't carefully read the comments section. 

As far as i'm aware the R33 is SARH only, now the reason it works is that the MIG-31 has a PESA so it can move its guidance beam nearly instantaneously. 

[TimeFaker 237]

3 hours ago, nighthawk2174 said:

As far as i'm aware the R33 is SARH only, now the reason it works is that the MIG-31 has a PESA so it can move its guidance beam nearly instantaneously. 

R-33S is active radar one afaik the base one is sarh

[Faster_Boiiiii 753]

11 hours ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Do you have any complaints against the current implemenation of the AIM-54?

its not giving a proper warning on RWRs that are capable of distinguishing between aircraft/ground radar and missile radar

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

9 hours ago, nighthawk2174 said:

As far as i'm aware the R33 is SARH only, now the reason it works is that the MIG-31 has a PESA so it can move its guidance beam nearly instantaneously. 

 

The initial phase has INS + SARH, the terminal phase utilizes ARH, like the Phoenix. 

 

They developed the RP-31 radar for the MiG-31 so that it can attack multiple targets simultaneously without the missiles confusing each other's targets. It has a special emitter in quasi-continuous mode to send coded signals to the missiles in order to do that. 

[Mr_New_Vegas 258]

They really need to make the game tell you when this missile goes active. Nearly strictly worse than a 7F right now.

[TimeFaker 237]

21 hours ago, Mr_New_Vegas said:

They really need to make the game tell you when this missile goes active. Nearly strictly worse than a 7F right now.

the f-14 didnt have this function the lock range is 16km so u can basically calculate or visually see it go active its not that hard

[spacenavy90 1,402]

9 minutes ago, TimeFaker said:

the f-14 didnt have this function the lock range is 16km so u can basically calculate or visually see it go active its not that hard

 

The seeker head has a range of 18km in real life, but in game it is closer to 4-5km. At that range your RWR will act as if you are being locked by an aircraft radar (coming from the missile).

 

[DSplayer 271]

6 hours ago, TimeFaker said:

the f-14 didnt have this function the lock range is 16km so u can basically calculate or visually see it go active its not that hard

IRL the F-14 did in fact have the ability to tell when the AIM-54 went active in TWS. Once the AWG-9 sent the active signal to the AIM-54, the Time Till Impact (TTI) counter on the TID for the target would start to blink which would indicate that it had gone active. 

 

 

 

On another note, I found a fleet video that showed the AIM-54 accelerating up to a pretty quick speed a couple of seconds after dropping off the rail, something that doesn't really show in WT:

 

And here's a video of an AIM-54C during a 1984 test which demonstrates its ability to pull Gs while on burner:

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by DSplayer

[InterFleet 359]

On 28/06/2022 at 14:56, tripod2008 said:

Ok, this is a pretty cool find, though looking at things I'm not sure that its the most recent revision of the document

 

The likely source of the 16G claims

It'd be nice to see someone attempt to replicate (and, record) this, for usage, analysis and assistance with developing various bug reports relating to the AWG-9 and AIM-54, though without the use of WRTI, a steady hand and luck; replicating the "defensive maneuver" will likely be very difficult; the "Drone" in question was most likely either a converted ex-Japanese F-86F, or ex-USAF F-86H (which is still missing from the tech tree), and we're completely missing non aircraft based drones, so some sort of stand-in may be needed for the other tests.

 

 

The only other thing of note in the document is;

 

PDF Page- #85 covers the AN/ALR-23 IRST? (the earlier of the IRSTS's that the F-14 was equipt with (the latter being the AN/AAS-42 found on the F-14D); which for whatever reason the F-14A "Early" doesn't have access to even as a mod) [The excerpt is likely from NAVAIR 01F-14AAA-1A; dated June 1st, 1974; "Figure 8-204" according to the bibliography]

 

 

Yeah testing the missile will be super hard without TacView, you can record your own plane via ThunderTac but there is currently no port for Missiles so you cannot observe how the missile behave.

However regarding the missile test it is very possible that the AIM54A can hit that QF86 in War Thunder as well, because it is only doing vertical plane manuver.

 

Considering it did a 174 degree dive its very likely that the lock gets lossed due to PD filtering, but in the end the plane did a 6G pull out of dive manuver which means the lock is likely re-aquired. Since the distance is so close, it is very likely that the AIM54 went active only after a few seconds. 

based on altitude change of 6200ft, it only decreased 1900m of altitude, which is not a lot for AIM54A to compensate both in game and IRL

 

Also if the missile is in Look up mode does it ignore notching? (both IRL and IWT info would be nice)

 

Still it would be interesting if someone can test this in game

Edited July 12, 2022 by InterFleet

[InterFleet 359]

The more interesting finding in the pdf is as follows

On page 36

Quote

Cruise missiles are a serious threat to surface ships. These weapons, which are launched from aircraft, surface ships, or submarines, can fly just above the surface of the water to avoid radar detection and interception by defensive weapons. Cruise missile vulnerability to Phoenix-armed F-14s has been demonstrated in man•; low altitude target attack missions. For example, the mission illustrated was a Phoenix shootdown attack on a very small simulated cruise missile target, a BOM-34A drone under remote operator control, which was flying 50 feet above the surface of the sea on a simulated anti-ship cruise missile attack . One Phoenix missile was launched from an F -14 at an altitude of 10,000 feet and a range of 22 nautical miles. The missile scored a lethal hit by passing the target within the Phoenix warhead lethal -radius and by having the warhead fuze (target d etecting device) trigger on the target.

Currently in game if you fly as low as 50ft ie 15m above the sea water the missile will result in a near miss.

 

@k_stepanovich I understand that because of computation power requirement, all surface currently have the same radar scattering model implemented. so when aircraft fly extremely close to the ground SARH missiles will not be able to target the plane.

However, we can consider changing the scatter model of water (ie sea) to allow better radar homing missiles' targeting of aircrafts against the background of the sea, so using SARH missile against low flying target above water is possible. (against target above land it should remain the same)

I am pretty sure a simple model can be implemeted without requiring a lot of computation power.

 

For example:

if below 50m, 

check the texture directly below the plane

     water ===>  radar will maintain lock on the plane and the missile will track.

     anything else ===> radar will lock below the plane and the missile will miss. (like what is currently implemented in game)

 

Also does radar get better look-down capabilities when they are above sea? The return would be more uniform and it should be easier to pick up a target against clutter?

 

Additionally, the Tomcat was flying at 10,000ft (ie 3000m alt) Mach 0.72 and launched against 50ft (ie 15m alt) Mach 0.75 target and the launch range was 22nm, ie 40.7km, I am pretty sure in War Thunder the missile will not hit because the launch zone indicator is only about 30km at such a low altitude. The missile will fall out of the sky before hitting the target. 

 

If someone can try these launch conditions it will be appreciated.

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by InterFleet

[nighthawk2174 80]

18 hours ago, InterFleet said:

Considering it did a 174 degree dive its very likely that the lock gets lossed due to PD filtering, but in the end the plane did a 6G pull out of dive manuver which means the lock is likely re-aquired. Since the distance is so close, it is very likely that the AIM54 went active only after a few seconds. 

Also if the missile is in Look up mode does it ignore notching? (both IRL and IWT info would be nice)

PD filtering would be search only, tracking it would be a speedgate.  And yes even in lookdown if the target return is stronger then the target.

[tripod2008 594]

Just made a bug report, I could use some help getting the noticed and dealt with a quickly as possible

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/e8jQtW5SGaCr

 

Edit: It's been Acknowledged.

Edited July 16, 2022 by tripod2008

[Valaerie 32]

On 12/07/2022 at 01:19, DSplayer said:

And here's a video of an AIM-54C during a 1984 test which demonstrates its ability to pull Gs while on burner:

 

If I tried any maneuvers like the ones in that video, my F-14's wings would explode.  Hell, they'll rip off in a simple positive G turn with no rudder and no afterburner.

[spacenavy90 1,402]

Proximity fuse distance increased to 20m.

 

[DSplayer 271]

"AIM-54A — remote fuze radius has been increased from 8 to 20 m."

Eyyy lets go

EDIT: Am a bit late but at least its in the official changelog.

Edited July 20, 2022 by DSplayer

[Hobel 99]

12 hours ago, DSplayer said:

"AIM-54A — remote fuze radius has been increased from 8 to 20 m."

Eyyy lets go

EDIT: Am a bit late but at least its in the official changelog.

That's good, but what document is that based on, since it's 15m everywhere else?