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

[Smoak741 1,140]

7 minutes ago, Hobel said:

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

Lets create a fix report. I will do that if i find a free time.

btw. can someone put a video with this 20m fuze?

[shanrocks1 383]

The new change to the fuze is pretty good. People now cant just get away with near misses. Wish they added the lofting though as I think without it it cant really go as far or retain the energy that its suppose to with lofting irl.

[spacenavy90 1,402]

6 hours ago, Hobel said:

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

 

There is no reliable (public) source for the fuze distance. Even the (50ft) 15m number comes from a website without a source.

[MythicPi 593]

Might be wrong but I suspect the AIM-54A might not have the damage to make full use of this 20m range.

 

Was comparing the code between the RIM-24A and AIM-54A and though the AIM-54A has 11kg more explosive filler and is a wider missile (tho not as long and lighter), the RIM-24A seems like it has larger values in most things seeming to be related to damage, even having bigger visual effects when hitting things.

 

Obviously tho, take that with a grain of salt, idk **** about the damage code and have yet to be able to test the AIM-54A since the buff as well. I suppose a hit is better than nothing tho, so the buff is appreciated reguardless

 

Has anyone else tested it or understand the damage code better?

[DSplayer 271]

On 21/07/2022 at 04:43, spacenavy90 said:

 

There is no reliable (public) source for the fuze distance. Even the (50ft) 15m number comes from a website without a source.

 

On 21/07/2022 at 05:42, MythicPi said:

Might be wrong but I suspect the AIM-54A might not have the damage to make full use of this 20m range.

 

Was comparing the code between the RIM-24A and AIM-54A and though the AIM-54A has 11kg more explosive filler and is a wider missile (tho not as long and lighter), the RIM-24A seems like it has larger values in most things seeming to be related to damage, even having bigger visual effects when hitting things.

 

Obviously tho, take that with a grain of salt, idk **** about the damage code and have yet to be able to test the AIM-54A since the buff as well. I suppose a hit is better than nothing tho, so the buff is appreciated reguardless

 

Has anyone else tested it or understand the damage code better?

In "An Outsider’s View Of The Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System" it does state that the effective range of the AIM-54's proximity fuse is approx. 50 ft (15 meters) so at least that 50ft number doesn't come out of nowhere.

 

Page 62 of "An Outsider’s View Of The Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System":

Spoiler

 

 

[Flame2512 3,386]

On 21/07/2022 at 06:20, DSplayer said:

 

In "An Outsider’s View Of The Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System" it does state that the effective range of the AIM-54's proximity fuse is approx. 50 ft (15 meters) so at least that 50ft number doesn't come out of nowhere.

 

Page 62 of "An Outsider’s View Of The Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System":

Hide contents

 

 

 

Interesting, page 62 is completely redacted in the copy @_David_Bowie_ posted.

 

That same the report also says on page 34 the lethal radius of the warhead is 25 ft (7.62 m).  So presumably that is where Gaijin g ot the 8 m proximity fuse value from (seems it's not as unreasonable as everyone on here thought).

 

I agree that a 15 m proximity fuse seems much more likely though.

[DSplayer 271]

4 minutes ago, Flame2512 said:

 

Interesting, page 62 is completely redacted in the copy @_David_Bowie_ posted.

 

That same the report also says on page 34 the lethal radius of the warhead is 25 ft (7.62 m).  So presumably that is where Gaijin g ot the 8 m proximity fuse value form (seems it's not as unreasonable as everyone on here thought).

 

I agree that a 15 m proximity fuse seems much more likely though.

Yeah the AIM-54 warhead being 15 meters is the best number that we've got especially considering that the warhead itself is a 133 lbs continuous rod warhead. I'd expect the proximity fuse to be a lot larger than just 25 feet (7.62 meters), especially since the explosive radius of the proximity fuse on the AIM-7F in WT is 8 meters with basically a 1/4 of the warhead explosive mass.

[Hobel 99]

2 hours ago, DSplayer said:

Yeah the AIM-54 warhead being 15 meters is the best number that we've got especially considering that the warhead itself is a 133 lbs continuous rod warhead. I'd expect the proximity fuse to be a lot larger than just 25 feet (7.62 meters), especially since the explosive radius of the proximity fuse on the AIM-7F in WT is 8 meters with basically a 1/4 of the warhead explosive mass.

 

The Aim9 has irl already 9meter
the Aim7 should have 12
and the Aim54 15 meters

http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Special/CLK_10.htm

http://alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-9B_Sidewinder_1A_SMC_-_January_1972.pdf

https://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-7F_Sparrow_III_SMC_-_January_1977.pdf

[DSplayer 271]

13 minutes ago, Hobel said:

 

The Aim9 has irl already 9meter
the Aim7 should have 12
and the Aim54 15 meters

http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Special/CLK_10.htm

http://alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-9B_Sidewinder_1A_SMC_-_January_1972.pdf

https://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-7F_Sparrow_III_SMC_-_January_1977.pdf

Yeah our WT proximity fuse values for missiles are very jank to say the least.

[DSplayer 271]

Former F-14 pilot says that the AIM-54 used a pulse radar. That should make it less susceptible to notching/beaming maneuvers.

[nighthawk2174 80]

On 23/07/2022 at 20:25, DSplayer said:

Former F-14 pilot says that the AIM-54 used a pulse radar. That should make it less susceptible to notching/beaming maneuvers.

You are correct the missile should be better able to handle beaming targets then how its currently modeled.  However it is a PD radar, I think he's just mis-remembering or just forgot to say pulsed Doppler.

 

[TimeFaker 237]

17 hours ago, DSplayer said:

Former F-14 pilot says that the AIM-54 used a pulse radar. That should make it less susceptible to notching/beaming maneuvers.

it uses a pd filter which would still make it behave like pd and u can notch it

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by TimeFaker

[oom1992 649]

I'm wondering accuracy of AIM-54C it as close to AIM-120A AMRAAM ?

F-14B carry AIM-54C Phoenix and AIM-9L sidewinder

Spoiler

 

[nighthawk2174 80]

5 hours ago, TimeFaker said:

it uses a pd filter which would still make it behave like pd and u can notch it

 

Can notch it while searching, it should use a speedgate for tracking in which case the MLC will need to be stronger then the target return.  The current implementation lacks this, this is how the F14 works in DCS though.

[TimeFaker 237]

3 hours ago, nighthawk2174 said:

Can notch it while searching, it should use a speedgate for tracking in which case the MLC will need to be stronger then the target return.  The current implementation lacks this, this is how the F14 works in DCS though.

u dont have to spam me okay?. dcs radar and missile guidance is broken even IR missiles can have a lock through clouds. f-16 and f/a18 radars are still getting tweaked and it seems to get performance declination. so i think we still need to wait for dcs to finish their missile guidance currently its in the dirt also the aim-54 was working on parallel navigation it got changed to proportional navigation last patch or before last patch. also keep in mind that it a high chance u talking abt the aim-54C not A the A is very easy to notch while c is very hard in dcs

Edited July 25, 2022 by TimeFaker

[nighthawk2174 80]

27 minutes ago, TimeFaker said:

u dont have to spam me okay?. dcs radar and missile guidance is broken even IR missiles can have a lock through clouds. f-16 and f/a18 radars are still getting tweaked and it seems to get performance declination.  so i think we still need to wait for dcs to finish their missile guidance currently its in the dirt also the aim-54 was working on parallel navigation it got changed to proportional navigation last patch

or before last patch.

Missile issues in DCS are under ED's purview they took over all the missile stuff after deka and HB both did their own CFD work on the missiles.

27 minutes ago, TimeFaker said:

also keep in mind that it a high chance u talking abt the aim-54C not A the A is very easy to notch while c is very hard in dcs

The report I quoted is for the AIM-54A so it is a PD radar, the report came out before the C was introduced.  It was specifically mentioned that a new variant was in the works but not ready yet in the report.  The F14's radar itself is handled by HB not ED and their recent addition of speedgate logic and comparing to MLC has made it much harder to notch.  AIM-54 issues in this regard are again ED issues HB can't control that.

Edited July 25, 2022 by nighthawk2174

[TimeFaker 237]

Just now, nighthawk2174 said:

Missile issues in DCS are under ED's purview they took over all the missile stuff after deka and HB both did their own CFD work on the missiles.

yes but still the missile still getting changed the navigation just got changed for example so its not finished until its finished also thats not true HB still working on the missile guidance system go to HB trello to check its one of the stuff they working on.

 

2 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

The report I quoted is for the AIM-54A so it is a PD radar.  The F14's radar itself is handled by HB not ED and their recent addition of speedgate logic and comparing to MLC has made it much harder to notch.  AIM-54 issues in this regard are again ED issues HB can't control that.

PD is even more easier to notch again the logic of the C is way above the A the A even in dcs is easy to notch over the c

[nighthawk2174 80]

1 hour ago, TimeFaker said:

yes but still the missile still getting changed the navigation just got changed for example so its not finished until its finished also thats not true HB still working on the missile guidance system go to HB trello to check its one of the stuff they working on.

Right and I was in the thread where this was reported, chizh had to go and work with them to change this.  However the base engine level functions such as simulating a speedgate are 100% on ED's side of things.

1 hour ago, TimeFaker said:

PD is even more easier to notch

Depends, in search notching is easy yes.  But in STT no its much harder and is really dependent on the situation. 

1 hour ago, TimeFaker said:

again the logic of the C is way above the A the A even in dcs is easy to notch over the c

Yes the C is vastly superior, I even have my suspicions that it has MPRF, but that doesn't mean the A can't have some ability against beaming targets.  There's some footage posted on this forum of an AIM-54A hitting a beaming target.  And again DCS issues on this front are really on ED's end here.  How the basic system works with regards to notching for everything but the amraam is largely unchanged since the lock on days.  Earlier this year they for some reason made it really easy to notch missiles.

Edited July 25, 2022 by nighthawk2174

[DSplayer 271]

On 24/07/2022 at 09:14, oom1992 said:

I'm wondering accuracy of AIM-54C it as close to AIM-120A AMRAAM ?

F-14B carry AIM-54C Phoenix and AIM-9L sidewinder

Reveal hidden contents

 

Considering a lot of the technology from the AIM-54C went into the AIM-120A, I'd imagine the AIM-120A was pretty good in terms of tracking performance. The only thing it would be lacking in would be motor performance along with some other features that probably went into the AMRAAM.

 

Also that's an AIM-9M-8 btw and not an AIM-9L.

[Slipz 939]

I don't know what happened but the Phoenixes are not working at all now (as in a couple of days ago when I recorded these videos) They were bad before but now they are non-functional.

 

[RAban 27]

As some people started suggesting Aim-54A should have loft capability in game where the missile is launched and is going up then drops down on the target and it's speed can reach up to mach 6. 

 

Useful info supposedly from a a guy that worked on phoenixes.:

 

Spoiler

AIM-54A was a very reliable and accurate missile that used an analog signal processing system in its Electronic Unit part of the Guidance Section. 54A used doppler proportional navigation whereby seeker head to target consecutive lines of site remained constant. At launch the missile performs a main beam avoidance manuveur (MBAM) to get the missile out of the powerful beam of the F14 radar which would wash out it's processing. The missile never knew its distance to the target until real close where the missile's Target Detection Device (pulse radar with 4 patch antennas) would act like a proximity fuze detonater. The missile was usually launched in semi-active mode whereby the missile processed returns from the F14 radar with a digital rear radio link from the aircraft that provided updates to the missile's EU integrating info to help point the seeker head, tune IF filters to acquire and maintain target track. At a close range the missile would go active and process returns from the missiles radar. Missile could be launch in Air Combat Mode (ACM) for close range fire and forget. The missile was designed to shoot down high altitude Mach 2.5 MIG 25 Foxbats. The missile would rise to a high altiude and scream down on its target achieving approx Mach 6.

 

AIM-54C. When the Shah's regime fell into the hands of the Ayatollah, the DOD claimed the missile was "Iranian Compromised" because many missiles were examined in KGB labs and determined the missiles transmitter frequencies and first and second intermediate frequencies used for processing. Thus, there was a rush to implement a "digital version" which was named the AIM-54C. 54C employed modern high speed bit slice microprocessor with reprogrammable memory and digital filters and digital signal processing. This design allowed the missile to operate over a wider range of frequencies, sniff the RF environment, and pick frequencies not jammed and well as implementing more advance electronic countermeasures algorithms. The missile used linear frequency modulation which would allow the missile to know its range and range rate to target. Later version AIM-54C (ECCM/Sealed) missiles did not required the aircraft thermal coolant and could operate over a wider temp range. Because the 54C was more complex and new it did not achieve quite the success that the 54A did in term of probability of kill but was still an effective weapon.

 

I'll look up my notes on the propulsion sections to see what the ifference in the Rocketdyne solid propellant rocket motors were and their thrust ratings.

 

Hope this helps a little from an AIM-54C Test And Evaluation Engineer

 

 

 

 

[DSplayer 271]

9 hours ago, N4PIERD4L4TOR said:

As some people started suggesting Aim-54A should have loft capability in game where the missile is launched and is going up then drops down on the target and it's speed can reach up to mach 6. 

 

Useful info supposedly from a a guy that worked on phoenixes.:

 

Hide contents

AIM-54A was a very reliable and accurate missile that used an analog signal processing system in its Electronic Unit part of the Guidance Section. 54A used doppler proportional navigation whereby seeker head to target consecutive lines of site remained constant. At launch the missile performs a main beam avoidance manuveur (MBAM) to get the missile out of the powerful beam of the F14 radar which would wash out it's processing. The missile never knew its distance to the target until real close where the missile's Target Detection Device (pulse radar with 4 patch antennas) would act like a proximity fuze detonater. The missile was usually launched in semi-active mode whereby the missile processed returns from the F14 radar with a digital rear radio link from the aircraft that provided updates to the missile's EU integrating info to help point the seeker head, tune IF filters to acquire and maintain target track. At a close range the missile would go active and process returns from the missiles radar. Missile could be launch in Air Combat Mode (ACM) for close range fire and forget. The missile was designed to shoot down high altitude Mach 2.5 MIG 25 Foxbats. The missile would rise to a high altiude and scream down on its target achieving approx Mach 6.

 

AIM-54C. When the Shah's regime fell into the hands of the Ayatollah, the DOD claimed the missile was "Iranian Compromised" because many missiles were examined in KGB labs and determined the missiles transmitter frequencies and first and second intermediate frequencies used for processing. Thus, there was a rush to implement a "digital version" which was named the AIM-54C. 54C employed modern high speed bit slice microprocessor with reprogrammable memory and digital filters and digital signal processing. This design allowed the missile to operate over a wider range of frequencies, sniff the RF environment, and pick frequencies not jammed and well as implementing more advance electronic countermeasures algorithms. The missile used linear frequency modulation which would allow the missile to know its range and range rate to target. Later version AIM-54C (ECCM/Sealed) missiles did not required the aircraft thermal coolant and could operate over a wider temp range. Because the 54C was more complex and new it did not achieve quite the success that the 54A did in term of probability of kill but was still an effective weapon.

 

I'll look up my notes on the propulsion sections to see what the ifference in the Rocketdyne solid propellant rocket motors were and their thrust ratings.

 

Hope this helps a little from an AIM-54C Test And Evaluation Engineer

I've seen that excerpt a lot of times and it's really cool. However that Mach 6 number is greatly exaggerated and would only be possible right as the missile's motor burns out when the missile was launched at high altitude and high speed. Even NASA's estimated speed and trajectory for their proposed Hypersonic Test launches had listed a maximum speed of Mach 5. Lofting should be a thing but in WT, the engagement ranges are extremely short (typically 35-45km aka 18-24nm). Even if lofting was there, it wouldn't loft very high at those ranges. 

 

On 01/08/2022 at 16:38, Slipz said:

I don't know what happened but the Phoenixes are not working at all now (as in a couple of days ago when I recorded these videos) They were bad before but now they are non-functional.

 

It's kind of a quirk on how AIM-54s work in WT. Especially since you don't need to support AIM-54s in WT for them to hit a target. AIM-54s and PD radars in general in WT cannot track cold or beaming targets basically at all and that results in your missile and/or your radar lock being lost. And AIM-54s are super slow in WT (at least visually) and highly visible so it results in a missile that is super easy to defeat.

 

In that 2nd video, your 2nd AIM-54 decided to start tracking your first AIM-54 and then your 1st AIM-54 got lost somehow.

[Slipz 939]

The AIM-54s once again work. They suck like normal now.

[MythicPi 593]

On 04/08/2022 at 04:15, RAban said:

As some people started suggesting Aim-54A should have loft capability in game where the missile is launched and is going up then drops down on the target and it's speed can reach up to mach 6. 

 

Useful info supposedly from a a guy that worked on phoenixes.:

 

Hide contents

AIM-54A was a very reliable and accurate missile that used an analog signal processing system in its Electronic Unit part of the Guidance Section. 54A used doppler proportional navigation whereby seeker head to target consecutive lines of site remained constant. At launch the missile performs a main beam avoidance manuveur (MBAM) to get the missile out of the powerful beam of the F14 radar which would wash out it's processing. The missile never knew its distance to the target until real close where the missile's Target Detection Device (pulse radar with 4 patch antennas) would act like a proximity fuze detonater. The missile was usually launched in semi-active mode whereby the missile processed returns from the F14 radar with a digital rear radio link from the aircraft that provided updates to the missile's EU integrating info to help point the seeker head, tune IF filters to acquire and maintain target track. At a close range the missile would go active and process returns from the missiles radar. Missile could be launch in Air Combat Mode (ACM) for close range fire and forget. The missile was designed to shoot down high altitude Mach 2.5 MIG 25 Foxbats. The missile would rise to a high altiude and scream down on its target achieving approx Mach 6.

 

AIM-54C. When the Shah's regime fell into the hands of the Ayatollah, the DOD claimed the missile was "Iranian Compromised" because many missiles were examined in KGB labs and determined the missiles transmitter frequencies and first and second intermediate frequencies used for processing. Thus, there was a rush to implement a "digital version" which was named the AIM-54C. 54C employed modern high speed bit slice microprocessor with reprogrammable memory and digital filters and digital signal processing. This design allowed the missile to operate over a wider range of frequencies, sniff the RF environment, and pick frequencies not jammed and well as implementing more advance electronic countermeasures algorithms. The missile used linear frequency modulation which would allow the missile to know its range and range rate to target. Later version AIM-54C (ECCM/Sealed) missiles did not required the aircraft thermal coolant and could operate over a wider temp range. Because the 54C was more complex and new it did not achieve quite the success that the 54A did in term of probability of kill but was still an effective weapon.

 

I'll look up my notes on the propulsion sections to see what the ifference in the Rocketdyne solid propellant rocket motors were and their thrust ratings.

 

Hope this helps a little from an AIM-54C Test And Evaluation Engineer

 

 

 

 

I wonder if theres any possible non-classified info this guy could provide for improving/fixing the AIM-54 ingame...

[MaMoran20@psn 198]

@k_stepanovichwhen would we be able to choose the distance it goes active? Its currently set at 16km, which comes from a sentence and its incorrect

Quote

The switch from mid-course to terminal guidance occurs about 10 NM(16 km) from the target

Which is just a statement giving the value for normal targets and the conversion from NM to km is wrong

Should be 6NM(11km), 10NM(18km) or 13NM(24km). If giving the option to choose size target is not viable, then it should be set at 6NM as thats the gameplay, engaging small maneuvering targets.

"guidance": {
      "inertialNavigation": true,
      "warmUpTime": 1.4,
      "workTime": 100.0,
      "uncageBeforeLaunch": true,
      "lockAfterLaunch": true,
      "useTargetVel": true,
      "lockTimeOut": 0.75,
      "lockDistance": 16000.0,
      "afterLaunchSpeedUp": 170.0,
      "breakLockMaxTime": 150.0,
      "inertialGuidance": {
        "inertialNavigationDriftSpeed": 10.0,
        "datalink": true

lock distance, make it 11000