Mad_Shell

I was looking a bit at some lua files in the game folders, and I perhaps found some questionable stuff in the Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\Scripts\Database\Weapons\warheads.lua For most warheads, expl_mass is equal to the quantity of explosive in the warhead, and not to the total mass of the warhead: warheads["C_5"] = -- S-5KO shaped-charge, fragmented { mass = 1.08, expl_mass = 0.37, -- Warhead 1.08 kg, explosive 0.37 kg + fragments bonus other_factors = { 1.0, 0.5, 0.5 }, concrete_factors = { 1.0, 0.5, 0.1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 0.0, obj_factors = { 1.0, 1.0 }, cumulative_factor= 3.0, cumulative_thickness = 0.1 }; warheads["C_8"] = -- S-8ÊÎÌ shaped-charge, fragmented { mass = 3.0, expl_mass = 0.855, -- Warhead 3 kg, explosive 0.855 kg + fragments bonus other_factors = { 0.5, 0.5, 0.5 }, concrete_factors = { 0.5, 0.5, 0.1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 0.0, obj_factors = { 0.5, 1.0 }, cumulative_factor= 5.0, cumulative_thickness = 0.3 }; warheads["C_8OFP2"] = -- S-8OFP HE { mass = 9.2, expl_mass = 2.7, -- Warhead 9,2 kg, explosive 2.7 kg + fragments bonus other_factors = { 0.5, 1.0, 1.0 }, concrete_factors = { 0.5, 1.0, 0.1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 0.3, obj_factors = { 0.5, 1.0 }, cumulative_factor= 0.0, cumulative_thickness = 0.0 }; but for some other warheads, the expl_mass is equal to the total mass of the warhead example: warheads["C_24"] = -- S-24 HE Warhead 123 kg, explosive 23.5 kg + fragments bonus { mass = 123.0, expl_mass = 123.0, -- Warhead 123 kg, explosive 23.5 kg + fragments bonus other_factors = { 1.0, 1.0, 1.0 }, concrete_factors = { 1.0, 1.0, 0.1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 1.0, obj_factors = { 0.2, 1.0 }, cumulative_factor= 0.0, cumulative_thickness = 0.0 };

You should read again what is written on Stormbirds It is said that the new module was initially meant to be showcased in the 2020 (and not 2021) trailer, but it was pushed back. The awaited module will be teased in the 2021 trailer, absolutely no doubt about that (confirmed again and again by Nineline, Bignewy and GlowingAmraam)

I agree, that's why I said "very possible". But the results seem pretty consistent, the S-300 fired at several targets at different ranges and altitudes, and in the best cases there was still a ~1500 kts gap compared to IRL according to the sources I found. And no way exterior parameters such as temperature, wind, humidity etc can affect speed that much.

SAMs are currently plagued with a lot of issues affecting their performances, especially linked to flawed guidance systems. Missiles guidance systems: Several trajectories are possible to intercept a flying target, and mathematical methods have been developped to find the most efficient ones. IRL, SAMs use methods such as: - (advanced) proportionnal approach - half-straightening approach - three points method - modified versions of some of the above methods also exist for low altitude targets to avoid the SAM to run into the ground. The discussion of those methods is way beyond the scope of this post, but basically missiles will use the most suitable method during their flight to be the most efficient (intercept the target with the most energy possible). Sometime a missile will switch method mid fligth, or even use at the same time a method in the horizontal plane, and another method in the vertical plane! And it allows to avoid having this happening IRL... I don't know exactly what guidance is used in DCS, but it looks like SAMs always try to lead targets, even when they are high G maneuvering at long distance. SAMs bleed all their energy way faster than they would do IRL, because IRL a SAM would not try to lead the target that much for most of the flight. I know implementing exactly the specific methods used by specific SAMs would be a daunting task, and that's not what I ask. Simply some more efficient guidance against high G maneuvering targets would already go a long way in making SAMs not behave in a ridiculous way. It is very possible that some missiles speeds are incorrect too. After some testing the 5V55R missile of the S-300 P SAM system reaches a maximum TAS of around 2500 kts (~ mach 4) in DCS, while several sources indicates a maximum TAS of more than 4000 kts(~ mach 6) IRL. As a result the maximum engagement range also seems slightly lower in DCS compared to IRL (~40 nm vs >50 nm).