Jump to content

DSplayer

Members
  • Posts

    387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About DSplayer

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    FSX, DCS
  • Location
    California, USA
  • Interests
    Electronics
  • Occupation
    Student

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah I can't really change that. Kinda comes with the thing. It's amazing that the mod even worked in the first place.
  2. You have to change the compass to COMP after taking off the carrier since the carrier is a giant metal object to interferes with compasses. EDIT: What Northstar98 said.
  3. Ah I was just saying what another forum author said a couple years back when I first heard of the book. The cockpit does look extremely clean though. The lack of missing paint and scratches is pretty amazing. Here's a lower res image that you were referring to. Wing sweep indicator warning light is on and pretty bright like you said.
  4. The only example of like a super clean F-14 would be images from the book The Cutting Edge by CJ Heatley which were taken during the beginning of the F-14 deployments iirc.
  5. Missiles like the AIM-9B, AIM-9J, AIM-9Ps, and R-60s are missing the nozzle_exit_area value while other missiles like the AIM-9L, R-27s, AIM-7s, and AIM-120s all have a nozzle_exit_area value. Here's a list that I've complied of missiles that I've noticed that are missing a nozzle_exit_area value: AIM-9B/GAR-8, AIM-9J, AIM-9P, AIM-9P5, AIM-9X, R-60, R-60M, R-24T, R-24R, R-40T, R-40R, R-3S, R-3R, R-13M, R-13M1, RS2US. There are most likely some missiles that I am missing that do not have that value.
  6. Little check up since a friend of mine pointed out to me that a value of 0.0068 being in square meters would make sense for a sidewinder. Considering the diameter of a AIM-9L is 5 inches. Shaving a bit off that number for material including casing, insulation, etc. could leave with a number around 3-4 inches (~0.09 meters) for a nozzle diameter that would allow for the 0.0068 sq meter value to make sense.
  7. I get what you mean. We don't know the units of nozzle_exit_area values and that leaves everything in the air and us in the dark. It reminds me of other values in the missile luas as well as War Thunder's (yeah ik) finAoA values being the percentage of a 90 degree angle. Perhaps other people more knowledgeable of the inner workings of the missile luas like @nighthawk2174 can perhaps help out if he knows what nozzle_exit_area's units is and how to calculate it.
  8. That's very possible that due to DCS simplifications that the nozzle_exit_area function is used for different purposes when compared to IRL but other air to air missiles (AIM-7s, AIM-9s, R-27s, SD/LD-10s, AIM-120s, and some of the newer A2G missiles like HARMs and Hellfires) in the DCS library still use that function with a value bigger than 1e-6 so I'm more inclined to think that it's being used to represent the nozzle exit area like it's supposed to. Here is where I got my idea of editing the nozzle_exit_area function anyway: A quick search for all uses of "nozzle exit area" in the forums brings up some posts as well: https://forum.dcs.world/search/?q="nozzle exit area"&quick=1&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy
  9. That’s true. Fudging the numbers in DCS is kinda the thing to do. Just always wondered since it was the only 3rd party missile that had that low nozzle exit value and was kinda curious after reading a thread that mentioned the nozzle_exit_area value being something that could effect performance. Just some food for thought.
  10. Heyo! Another week, another potentially useless AIM-54 test. This time I tested the straight line performance of the AIM-54 if you change the nozzle_exit_area value. This is after I read a forum thread that said that it nozzle_exit_area value could potentially increase the performance of a missile if the missile didn't have this value previously. Currently the AIM-54s have a nozzle_exit_area value of 1e-6 aka 0.000001. Compared to the R-33E, a rough equivalent that we have in-game, that missile has a nozzle_exit_area value of 0.025. Even the AIM-9L has a nozzle_exit_area value of 0.0068 so I assumed that the 1e-6 value was a placeholder value that never got changed. So I decided to test how the AIM-54 variants performed with the R-33E's nozzle_exit_area value in a straight line test similar to those in the AIM-54 Whitepaper. What I've found is that at higher altitudes, the increased nozzle_exit_area will allow all the AIM-54 variants to achieve an increased speed of at least 0.1 Mach with the largest difference being roughly an additional 0.5 Mach at 12km altitude with the AIM-54A-Mk60. Graphs: Link to graphs on Google Sheets so you can hover over the lines 500m 6km 12km The performance improvement thanks to an increased nozzle exit area was staggering in my opinion. But, of course, that value of 1e-6 could've been intentional the entire time and this test was purely academic on what the nozzle exit area can do. With the upcoming reassessment of the AIM-54 motors by HB, maybe this can be possibly addressed. AIM-54 Normal.acmiAIM-54 New Nozzles.acmi
  11. I don't think the AIM-9E was even equipped on Iranian F-14s considering the AIM-9E's age by the time the F-14s were acquired. Modelling the 9E probably will come with HB's F-4 implementation tho.
  12. Considering those air force AIM-9s (starting with the 9E) did have the ability to uncage the seeker, I'd assume SEAM would just enable you to uncage the missile and be on your merry way. Plus the Iranian F-14 we're getting isn't going to get those really improvised weapons mounted on F-14s (Hawk missiles, R-27s, etc.) so it shouldn't be too much of a change.
  13. Here you go: HARM + AIM-9JP + AIM-7E Mod for F-14.zip
×
×
  • Create New...