Pavlin_33

If you need someone to help you out, I would be more than happy to do it.

Thats's a bit funky. The missile has no idea where the ground is and neither the launching aircraft (DCS ones). What could be possible is that at a certain altitude (altitude at launch minus current alt) it stops making huge intercepts. But this would only work for certain terrain. More important point is that we have no prof that 120 has this capability. We are just guessing here. Also, do we know any A2A missile that does?

Was about to mention this. We just assumed that 120 has this capability.

I am looking for one. Location: Berlin. Please message me via PM if still available.

I'm no expert but it seems to me like a guidance bug. I would expect a missile to go kind of parallel close to a maneuvering target. With this kind of intercept it would take it Saturn V rocket motor to reach the Viper.

The 77 has an old API, so basically what you did there takes the best advantage of it. You put it on your 3-9 line and made a rapid altitude change. Notice how it turns down below the ground to intercept you. Not sure why it turned parallel though, must have lost track or something,

I've been thinking about this topic for a while, I fly mostly red planes, and came to the conclusion: doesn't the West radar do exactly the same? Isn't moving the TDC (not 100% sure if that's how the target designator is called) up 'n' down the same as adjusting the Flanker's expected target distance? If am not badly mistaken, NATO and Soviet radars are controlled the same way, it's just that the Soviet ones care about the search "center" and the NATO ones care about search area limits. For someone who flies blue fighters rarely, I find the radar misleading, 'cause if I set the radar at 80nm and scanning from 0 to 60K ft it seems that I will pick up targets that inside these parameters and this is really not true - learned that the hard way. What this setting does instead is basically telling the radar: "Hey, search [for a target] from 0 to 60K ft AT 80nm". If a target is at 40nm, this does not guarantee it will be picked up if it's height is above or below. But I set it to cover 0 to 60K, how come? Soviet-styled radar is more like: point and shoot. Also, the expected target distance will automatically position the radar's elevation to the correct angle. Antenna's tilt will not be the same for a target that is 3km below you at 10km distance and 3km below you at 80km.

Shots fired

I stand corrected. Mass is a factor determining terminal velocity: increase in mass, increases V c Thank you for pointing this out. I could not find a valid reference for it's terminal velocity nor for its drag coefficient. There is this paper here about Mk-82, but I think that Cd that coefficient seems too low, for some reason.

Just to make it clear: weight has nothing to do with terminal velocity. I know it's counter-intuitive, that's why I mentioned the hammer and feather example. I don't really have proof strictly speaking, but you can't expect a similarly-shaped object (bullet-bomb) to have air resistance order of magnitude less. Having said that, I am yet to verify how much would a bomb-shaped object accelerate/decelerate.

I highly doubt as they are consistenty falling short. This would imply that every time it was a direct head-wind case.

Any idea what range that was? Burn through distance is the same for all fighters in DCS, so it should be easy to tell.

To be honest I don't know. My ECM knowledge is limited to FC3. You said you were toggling the jammer on/off - I guess the 120 switches its radar on after the ECM are switched off. What happens if you keep the jammer on and the 120 is fired at you otside the attackers burn through distance? Does it still go active?

The entire ECM topic is a bit out if my competences, but in DCS: 1. I guess burn through for AIM120 is the same as the pitbill distance 2. 120 in HOJ does not emit any radiation so if you had RWR indication, it was not fired in HOJ

That's very weird. It implies that the bomb's terminal velocity is above Mach 1.0, which I find hard to believe. Quick search yields that a t.v. of a bullet is around 200mph/320kph. I can't imagine that a MK84 would have much higher than that.

What makes you thing it has enough power to "burn through" the jammer. 120 in HOJ does not use its own radar, BTW - it does but in passive mode.

Feelings are not reliable. That's why we invented science. The bomb will decelerate to its terminal velocity. At this speed it will impact the target. If there was no air, the bomb would continue to increase its speed until impact. P.S. Termnial veolcity is the speed at which the force of air resistance (drag) will be the same as the force of gravity. It depends of the object's shape. That's why a feather falls slower than a hammer. P.P.S. What happens in the track? I am away from DCS.

Su-27 has a target size setting?

This company did a F-16 RCS simulation, but I have no idea how to read the results: https://wipl-d.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/RCS_002_WIPL-D_Monostatic_RCS_of_Fighter_Aircraft.pdf

Which part do you need the sources for?

Even without the override, that is at 7.5G, it still has superior turning performance. What that document shows is that it can endure around 30 deg angle of attack - hence why such high G load at realtively low speed. As @BIGNEWYsuggested, things might get revised.

Yup the document seems to suggest that F-18 has both better turn rate at both corner speed and as sustained turn rate. It's insane turn-rate comes from insanely tight turn radius at high loads. I persoanly had no idea that Hornet is supposed to turn better than the Viper. To be honest something seems a bit off there. F-15 is also intended for 9G as well as the MiG-29 as these are their max loads.

This is simply not true. Even with missiles involved, being the first one to point the nose on the enemy will depend on your state. In a one-circle fight it will be the fighter with the smaller radius of turn and in a two-circle fight it will be the fighter with a higher turn rate. That's why one-cirlce (nose to nose) fight is called "radius" fight and two-circle (nose to tail) is called "rate" fight. Reason for this is simple: geometry. To illustrate this I've created a rudimentary animation here: https://jsfiddle.net/0f7r61me/2/ Blue fighter has double the turn rate of the red one, while the red fighter has half the turn circle. From the animation, it's clear who gets the first shot.

Well TOR has some arcade-like interface in CA. Would be great if we had at least something similar in other SAM sites also :D.