FIXED! DCS: F/A-18C Hornet | AIM-120 AMRAAM Tutorial From A Historical Perspective

Hey Guys! I made a pretty glaring mistake in my first Go-around on this video so redid it! Here is the fixed version and I hope you guys learn a little somethin'!
This is a tutorial how to best employ the AIM-120 with the DCS: F/A-18C Hornet from Eagle Dynamics.
I know there has been a lot of discussion regarding the AIM-120 on the forums and I wanted to give my perspective on the way it is modeled here in DCS World as well. I believe there is a historical precedent for how it works in game.
However the missile is modeled, the full capabilities of the missile will be Classified for a VERY long time.

[@boilermaker7754]

Thanks Spud, good stuff ...always enjoy learning more of the DCS world.

[@Spudknocker]

Thanks for the support man!

[@rossb2006]

At 1:45 when you select AIM120 and engage AA mode I notice that your left DDI (EW) sticks. If I do the same thing my left DDI immediately jumps back to Stores, am I missing something obvious?

[@kirreenable]

I think thats because the video is two years old, I haven't played for that long but it seems like the behavior has been changed.

[@dmsdmullins]

I was an AWACS crew chief from 2001 to 2007. Flew on many exercises and real-world missions including training for ramp-up to the 2nd Gulf War. DCS is way off in many aspects concerning weapons engagement and detection range from a 2007 perspective.

[@colderwar]

DCS doesn't do a good job of simulating electronic warfare, radar, missile aerodynamics and missile guidance. They are reworking all the missiles, starting first with the AIM-120, so we'll see what happens.

[@daddyrabbit835]

My radar literally never picks up a target in BVR... as a matter of fact it never picks up anything. I can be looking forward through my cockpit and can see the aircraft... and nothing on the radar. Switching modes doesn't fix anything. WTH? I'm so frustrated with this game. I just fire the AIMs in Maddog mode and sometimes this they hit. Not sure what I'm doing wrong. Even during the training, I may pick up one brick on my right DDI and that's it.

[@cameronchase4071]

this is an old video. the f18 radar got massively nerfed recently and its hard to pick stuff up now. make sure you turn datalink on and have one of your screens set to SA so you can see bandits with the help of awacs

[@cayenne7792]

Thanks for your efforts!!! @Spudknocker, How do you deal with the super frustrations of the never ending and infinite bugs and errors that never get fixed or when they do they don't last long until they are nerfed again? After 15 years of patience I find the disappointments outweigh the pleasure. I'm always looking for the few things that work so i can stay away from the many things that don't work. HOW do you maintain your sanity? How many takes do you have to do to get a complete unborked video?

[@Spudknocker]

While DCS has some issues, there’s far more positive that outweighs the negative, enjoy and love the things that DCS does well and stop doom scrolling through forums and Hoggit haha

[@bernhardfischer236]

How can I find out when the Aim-120 goes bitbull? In Falcon 4.0 there was an indicator on the radar but I can't find anything here.

[@Spudknocker]

It is actually on the Hud the is a count down to active, I am afraid that I launched the missile too close to the target in this video and it didn't show up

[@richardpetty6464]

AIM-120 does not go on LAU-115 launcher by them selves station 8, they need LAU-127's to be flown on LAU-115 launcher

[@Spudknocker]

You're gonna have to take that one up with ED my friend. Thanks for the view!

[@romeowhiskey846]

Did you use any post processing software for your DCS? E.G: Reshade

[@v1_oh_no]

Hey man great video. Why didn't the first Fox 3 have a Time to Active (ACT)? I noticed the others did. I am also finding that there are a lot of F16 users on the multiplayer servers that are foxing at further distances than the hornet is and are splashing the hornet in most of the fights. If it's the same missile, why is this happening?

[@DJones476]

Mostly because the Hornet's radar, ECM, SMS, and even some of its FCS capability is nerfed to Hell and gone by ED (for security reasons).

[@simonhouel1984]

Blue Thunder !

[@Primaate]

Hey thx for info on radar glitch ; question unrelated u may know (or anyone)--- im new to DCS and the scale v speed (apparent) to me looks off. Why, when I'm doing mach 1, does it seem like maybe 500 km/h? I've flown (dads a pilot) and driven at speeds 250 km/h +, and mach 1 (in DCS) at low low altitude feels like ~40% approx. what I'd expect (~1200 km/h). Any ideas why?

[@reillybrangan2182]

Tha majority of your perception of speed will come down to proximity and field of view, altering your field of view will yeild different results.

[@possiblyadickhead6653]

Your eyes and your brain measure speed by the amount of changes kinda

[@katumus]

The problem is in the DCS 2.5 new implementation of the technology called "SpeedTrees" (that is made by other company, sold for movie industry to quickly generate random forests and foliage etc) and that Eagle Dynamics made a serious compromise in the performance. Still there ain't a computer that could render all the trees in the hundreds of kilometers areas. So they needed to minimize the amount of trees visible. But they didn't want to sacrifice the visuals so that you have just few places where are trees or there are huge distances between individual trees, so what they did was they did scale the trees larger than realistically would be. forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=201645 But point is, the trees height should be about correct... I just believe the lack of speed sensation is more from the lack of the fine details on ground. Like bushes, rocks, fine ground textures etc. As if those would exit, you would totally feel the speed as you would be gazing past those.

[@highlanderc]

Where can you download this mission?

[@nighthawk2174]

Except there isn't a historical premise that supports how missiles are modeled in this sim. Lets just take guidance alone.... it has been stated multiple times that the guidance is quite bad and it alone invalidates DCS as a way to look at the AMRAAM's performance. kzbin.info/www/bejne/haTFaJSkgtJkd7s - is a good video on what different types of guidance look like, current DCS missiles are about 35 seconds into the linked video (you can see this just over a longer range at 6:00 into your vid). Whereas where they should be is at 1.30 into the video I linked. I would be glad to discuss this further if you are via discord or even in the chat here.a

[@thekitchengunsmith6435]

Is TWS going to be available for the F18 anytime???

[@MrEfoefi]

How would you compare the DCS and BMS versions of the AIM120? Who do you think implement them correctly?

[@Spudknocker]

Nick you know I have never played BMS and I can’t say as to whether or not they are implemented correctly in either, due to the highly classified nature of missile performance data. My point here is usually people have higher expectations for the missile than they should. Also the performance we see in the missile in my very humble opinion matches with what I have read

[@MrEfoefi]

In BMS (and I highly recommend you to try it out) the AIM120 is way more lethal when in DCS on longer ranges. I'm not sure if that because they implement the guidance in a more optimal way or is it because they give it more energy. That could be interesting If could take a look at BMS or judge by multiple videos that are out there and give your opinion. Anyway, thanks for your video - good stuff.

[@nighthawk2174]

Nick I will bassicly repost my comment from reddit here and you can take it at face value, I did post it here in the comments along with a few othe dissenting voices but it seems that those comments have either been deleted or hidden. forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806 ---- missile mod reference www.dropbox.com/s/oa8b82ff4jg12kr/MissileMod_1.3.zip?dl=0 --- updated version that I made to get this working with the latest version of DCS, also I made my own improvements doing some cfd for the SAM's in the game and also adjusting gun dispersion based on feedback from a real pilot i'm friends with . Personally, I agree with @Essah **(comment removed/deleted by someone... maybe even the writer... but he and I basically agreed)** here and I want to add to his point. It has been shown multiple times that missiles in DCS experience more drag than they should along with a poor guidance model (recently updated but not perfect) made the missile lack range that it should not. One big problem with long range shots (as is shown in your video) is lofting at long range the missile should immediately climb to gain an altitude advantage and get into thinner air. In my own testing of the missile mod this is what i've come up with: imgur.com/a/H2RKPUh *AS A NOTE* this was back when the loft function for the AMRAAM was working (i had to tweak the code to get the missile to actually loft though) as of right now though in default DCS as is shown in your vid at 5:30 with your first AMRAAM it did not loft. Now also to get onto guidance reference this video kzbin.info/www/bejne/haTFaJSkgtJkd7s or if your adventurous this book: www.amazon.com/Missile-Guidance-Control-Systems-Siouris/dp/0387007261 . Note how at 6:00 the missile is not leading the airplane like a true APN missile should as seen at 1:30 in the video I just linked.... and that's not even the best guidance you can get or should have on a modern AMRAAM. Basically it has the guidance of a missile at :35 seconds into the video I linked. Overall I think you are underestimating the AMRAAM... as a buddy told me 'only if I could tell you just how OP the AMRAAM actually is' and this is to me who thinks the amraam is really good.... I would love to see you try out BMS or the missile mod!!! and its missile model which I think is a far better representation of its performance, just note though the missile in BMS is the C3 not the C5 we have in DCS so it should have less range than what one would expect in DCS.

[@MrZockerfreak11]

Nighthawk2174 BMS is an F-16 turkey shoot and the targets are mostly AI. If you shoot stupid AI planes flying at 30k feet in DCS you will easily get kills at 20 miles with the AMRAAM. The 120s strength is the active seeker, not range. Its a 7 second missile burn, after that it runs on pure optimism. People seem to forget that.

[@MrEfoefi]

An AA missile is not a rock and it not working on "pure optimism". One of the biggest advancements in AA missile technologies were the improved guidance algorithms. The better the algorithm - less energy will be lost allowing the missile to go further and improve the kill probability. Saying "BMS is an F-16 turkey shoot..." is simply not a serious comment.

[@christiancphoenix1]

Could have gone over hud symbology and pitbull. Not very detailed explanation

[@Spudknocker]

You're right, I was unfortunately a little too rushed getting this one out, I apologize for that.

[@eagleonesims613]

Thank you sir

[@Spudknocker]

No problem!

[@frag3rb0y]

this is my skin :D

[@Spudknocker]

Sure is man! I love showing off community skins!

[@bonerjhs]

Looks good on the ole Lego...

[@wabbit234]

Do you use any shaders or is it just the time of day that makes it look so nice?

[@Spudknocker]

Wabbit I really move messing around with the weather and time settings in DCS all of my videos are stock DCS. The only color change I made is I turned digital vibrancy up to 65 in Nvidia control panel

[@wabbit234]

Oh nice. That boost in colour makes all the difference. Thanks!

[@Spudknocker]

Wabbit yep it really does!

[@bowlingjoel]

what are your system specs?

[@86abaile]

What was wrong in the first video?

[@Spudknocker]

Made a mistake with how I was positioning the target in my targeting retacle

[@cyrus6250]

You mentioned that Iraqi MiG-25s and MiG-23s simply ran away from the AIM-120s fired against them by turning around and lighting their afterburners. Assuming the American pilots fired the AIM-120 in TWS, how did the Iraqi pilots infer they were being shot at? The AIM-120 rocket motor produces very little smoke.

[@Spudknocker]

That is a very good question, and I do not have all of the answers to that, they could be been somehow tipped off by GCI that was listening in on American frequencies or looking at American formations on radars that were safely outside of the No-Fly Zone, there were a number of victories with the AIM-120 during the Southern Watch period and this may have helped teach Iraqi pilots what to look for in terms of warning signs, the hard way. Also we can't discount the fact that by the mid to late 1990s Iraqi pilots have either been flying directly against or in the vicinity of American pilots and aircraft for more than a decade. While they may not have been able to contest American air dominance that doesn't mean that they were stupid.

[@RPrubber]

If u know that the enemy have AIM120 then its not as hard to know then they shoot at you. Same behaviour was seen by Iran F14s with AIM54 in Iran-Iraq War.

[@William3000x]

Probably by just defensively presuming they're being shot when they are within the known range of a certain type of weapon, even when it's not actaully happening. That would be just for safety measures. I remember from lots of tutorials and demonstrations about BVR engagement and defensive tactics, that you should ALWAYS assume the enemy will attack you with the best weapons they have at their disposal. I mean, when you know there is an F-18 around, then you should always assume they're carrying AIM-120s and AIM-9s, even if they're not (you never know, so it's better to be prepared for the worst case scenario). Probably the MiG pilots never actually knew they were in fact being shot, and they just preventively turned cold and ran back, because they knew they were within range for that shot. I've had that happening to me a few times in DCS. Evaded a missile that I didn't even know it was in the air, simply because I knew I was in range and preventivley decided to turn back.

[@katumus]

GCI sees missiles in their radars and they can see your flight formations and knows your tactics. So GCI tells you to turn or simply sends a datalink command and your fighter turns as commanded from ground. Pilot ain't allowed always to question what GCI does as they have total situational awareness that pilots don't. There is many ways how you can avoid even best missiles while offensive or defensive, but turn and burn is one of the easiest. Remember too that if you deny someone entering airspace, you are doing better than if launching missile. If you can get strike aircraft drop their ordinance, then again better than shooting them down. Air combat is not about destroying targets, it is about wearing enemy will to combat and surrender.

[@hannesorisson1200]

Would AIM 120 shot be detected by ground radar? Just wondering. I know it is a very small signature

[@kevinacres1699]

I don't know what variant of the AMRAAM you are using but do you realize the amount of wasted money that was for your demonstration? I'm from Canada and a budget disclosed that we spent $140 mil for 32 of them and some training variants. So I would reconsider your use of very expensive resources for your youtube demonstrations

[@samsmith6791]

It's a game dude, no money was wasted

[@StoneCoolds]

Journalists not knowing what their are talking about? Wow never suspected that one 🙄 lol

[@possiblyadickhead6653]

Wtf prove him wrong

[@katumus]

Actually many journalist is not knowing what they talk about, but they talk with the knowledge of the source. But the problem can become that the source doesn't know it neither. This is what happened in WW2 reportage, there was no real knowledge and information, sources were wrong. Today we take lots of things granted because we have had Internet since 70's and especially WWW since mid 90's (more like actually early 2000) when the different WWW services started to appear to allow sharing pictures, video and have a nice visual forums (WWW forums, post that were newsgroups etc that even today are more advanced than ie. KZbin comment section or any HTML made forum). Back then you needed a good and valid way to transfer information. Like how did you get something from one side of the country to another? Basically mailing it, moving it yourself, maybe over a telephone or in fancy matter a FAX. And what this has to do with the "journalist not knowing what they are talking about"? It is that journalist were really, really depending from their sources. And when a source tells that a new missile performance is (as example) 120km range, Mach 3.3 and 75% hit probability to target. It gets easily repeaten by the journalist and written to magazine or told in documentary in TV. Now, the all required information might have been missing from the start or leaved out as it "doesn't matter". Like that to get that 120km range, you need to launch the missile from altitude (10 000 meters) on bomber size target that is at low altitude (1000 meters) and is flying straight toward you at Mach 1.0 and doesn't maneuver at all. Now, that is the likelyhood of the best scenario. And that claim of missile performance would be 100% true! But you just don't know the parameters where it does so. Change the parameters and suddenly you would need to explain all things to reader, and it becomes boring and bad story. No knowledge transmitted from source to reader that the Mach 3.3 is the peak speed just before rocket engine burns out. That the maximum range is depending from the launch altitude vs target altitude and target speed and heading. So then you have the kids reading the books, internet etc, watching documents etc and they hear these fancy words "120 km range" and suddenly they wonder that something is wrong when their missile in the game doesn't fly 120km but just a 30km and then drops dead, sometimes it is just a 5km and dead... And trouble is that while journalist knew exactly what they were writing, they just didn't deliver all the knowledge that was required!