Ragnarok

Is it associated with microlag in multiplayer?

not the point of efficiency, but the presentation of natural laws. not the point of the type of missile, but this is true for the R-27ER. @GG data are relevant. For request of data delivery, please contact my squadron! http://www.4c-squad.rs/

Testing R-27ER, beta open 1.2.7 Conditions: head on, one mach mutually, no maneuvering target. 38km distance launch High Altitude 6km (attacker) vs. 4km (target) the time it takes to hit 43 s speed of the projectile at the time goal: 970km / h High Altitude 4km (Forward) vs 6km (target) the time it takes to hit 45 s speed of the projectile at the time goal: 830km / h difference 2 s (According to my data it is good) 58km distance launch atitude 8km (attacker) vs. 10km (target) the time it takes to hit 61 s speed of the projectile at the time goal: 950km / h 10km (attacker) vs. 8km (target) the time it takes to hit 56 s velocity projectile point scorer: 1150km / h difference 5 s (According to my data it is very good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) 51km distance launch atitude 6km (attacker) vs. 10km (target) the time required to score: 53.5 s speed of the projectile at the time goal: 930km / h 10km (Forward) vs 6km (target) the time it takes to hit 48 s velocity projectile point scorer: 1230km / h difference 5.5 s s (According to my data, should be 8 seconds. What is wrong here?) Ok, you fire with critics! :thumbup: ************** Addition: 58km distance launch 12km (attacker) vs. 8km (target) difference 10 s (also very good)

correction of the course does not mean that everything is running smoothly and properly. Although I think that this phenomenon is not a simulation course corrections. Size of the parabola will forever remain a mystery for the simulator, but I have high praise for precision in 1.2.7!

Testing for non maneuvering targets work best against F-5. Set the task "nothing".

Track file which you recorded in the previous patch, should show the difference when you run an the next patch. If the patch has brought something else, patch interpret same track file in its different manner. Just follow the values ​​and compare!

At low altitudes when a smaller distance, the most important factor for range is the time of the engine. The second is the resistance (diameter of missile and AoA) that also limits the maximum speed ( even if the benefit is for Mach 0.5 at high altitude, low altitude of this difference is almost obliterated). Massive missile in these conditions will not add to the range of its inertia as a high-altitude! At high altitudes and long range all the reversed: 1. max speed + inertia (mass) most important; 2. resistance; 3. time of the engine smallest factor, believe it or not! Should be noted that mass is a one factor for AOA (a factor of resistance), but I said it as a factor of inertia. if the engine for AIM-120C is 13 seconds and the engine for ER 9 seconds, if this is relevant, then the range at low altitudes is realistic in DCS. My advice for playing with ER (no for 51., they known this :) ) is: shoot ER high over the enemy and keep the lock on below the enemy, deep diving.

Then tell me this: on what type of interception is carried out in the last couple of kilometers from the target? (ARH or SARH) - full interception? https://www.dropbox.com/s/ajew3s25taqqiz0/2013-11-03_222706.png - semi interception? https://www.dropbox.com/s/5pm71tvyr4m72us/2013-11-03_222718.png - method of "three points"(T/T)? https://www.dropbox.com/s/2joantl8y97mtir/2013-11-03_222649.png

To better clarify! If we go over the plane for 15deg of the direction of the oncoming missile, at a distance of 1.5km, missile has to go in front of the aircraft to intercept the example of 20deg, not like an aircraft at 15deg. If a sudden turn in the opposite direction, we are giving the task to the missile interception reorient to the opposite side. Although I say 30deg / s, I think 3/4 sec is how you might maneuver (this is just an example). For 3/4 sec for me to go around 22deg. Means to 15deg on one side I turn to the other side 7deg in relation to the missile. In order that missile to intercept, have a task of 20deg one side move to 10 deg on the other side. Because 3/4 sec missile can sometimes exceed approach 800 meters (point of interception is reduced this time), angle displacement can be for an additional 10deg on the other side starting from the initial position of the 1.5km which makes the overall task of 40 deg, ! The maximum turn missile depends, of course, limits G force. But the optimal speed for the most G force is not helpful if the electronics response is not consistent with the reaction of controllable surface missile. Because of this maneuver the plane does not even have to turn up quickly (although desirable) to overcome this effect. because of this situation, moving on the opposite side of the intercept, the missile must endure 3-3.5 higher G-forces from the plane, and because the velocity of the missiles (medium range) in a similar relation higher, than the plane! If the maneuver start earlier, missile have an easier task then no problem to escort the target.

Exactly! Somewhere in the earlier pages I wrote that medium range missile can't follow a target of more than 30deg per/sec. Sudden reversal in the side of missile when the missile is very close to us, in theory, it is sufficient to avoid. The DCS is something similar! Simple aerodynamic equations are based on calculations with AoA of missiles at the minimum speed up to aerodynamic collapse of the horizontal flight. Generally speaking, the ER after the engine is experiencing a rapid collapse (in low altitude) as opposed to the AIM-120, especially the R77, but however, these missiles have subsequently collapse, are actually gliding with small speed and as such they need a long time to move greater distances in. Speed of ARH is more important for the work of his radar. R77 additionally has a high resistance, and while experiencing the collapse of velocity of all medium missiles still has the smallest range at low altitudes! Situation where ER is the best when it launches from a great height and follows the target down (compared to ARH). AIM-120 is better when launched horizontally at lower altitudes or when to follow up on the target (for ER this is hard work). This is the biggest problem for the ER, where they are best used in kinematics it is easiest to break the radar lock. This is the main reason why ARH is better than SARH. Everything else are little things in the date of manufacture. Defensive ability of ARH's primary concept of constructors, of course!

You are not precise enough but there is truth in what you say. For your dilemma try this Angle of atak does not exist but no maneuvering so called linear range it is more similar to FC3 than FC2.

0:26:32 talking about RCS from F-15/Su-27 (F-15 12m2!)

Thank you! I am pleased with the answer.

GGTharos, give me a valid document showing that for AIM120C5 a booster engine for more than 10 seconds with a thrust >85 kN, and marching burning more than 20 seconds with a thrust >than 0.5 kN, fuel weight greater than 75kg and the existence of two pulse motors for overcoming resistance in turn. After that I will ED present all formulas on flying quality characteristics managing according to the this document. https://www.dropbox.com/s/xqllh8njx8ajsk0/NASA%20AFM%20missiles.pdf If you don't give me a document, do not call me ignoramus. And in my work we will agree on a price. :smilewink:

When the fuel runs out subject to the laws and any flying object. At high altitude indicated speed is small for missile which is designed to fly at Mach 3-4. Talking about speeds <2200km / h AFM for missiles in FC1 and FC2, we can say, almost is not there. In FC3 not yet as it should be...

I support this. Unless ED documents prove that there is no need for this. ED should submit documents because FC is not just for gaming but also for education.

ET has no data link. But may I ask? Why are ED talking about advanced flying model missiles, when only includes an additional factor of energy loss!? Missiles again abnormally turning at low speeds and high altitudes. The load on the wings of a missile is not in accordance with the laws of physics... And why go to all missile in full interception immediately after as they launch? Semi interception does not exist now in fc3

how much RCS at F15 when wearing a 3x Fuel tank? RCS for MiG29 is 5m2, F15-12-15m2, Su27-15-20m2, (full load and maximally exposed aspect) all the little variations. Basic physical laws are sufficient!

How do you know how many missiles climb higher after the launch, and what are the differences between SARH and ARH in this fact??? Give me any kind of document. Do not tell me how long you read the internet. This is the factor with which you can manipulate with a range of up tomorrow!!!

Good, but why do not you present the data? If ER is bad, and AIM is good, I am accepted it, but provide information. How to could I see I was mistaken? As I gave you the wrong information, so you give me the right information!

@GGTharos Is that Snowden?:) If you've got the right man in the right place, be sure not to give accurate information. The reason is logical. It does not matter what you and I disagree on this one, but look at this picture. https://www.dropbox.com/s/e30w9khzi31asnt/AIM-120A.gif This is AIM120A. It does not matter whether this is reliable. It does not matter whether this created a military expert or my grandmother. But clearly shows what the author describes. My question: Do you have any of these charts for the missile used in FC that you think should be the way they are in FC? Charts for AIM-120C5, AIM-120B, AIM-7M, R-27R/ER, RVV-AE???

Serbian air force last year upgraded radar on the MiG-29B. We had to order a 6 new missiles R-27R from Russia for 250 000 dollars that have seekers compatible with the new radar. In stock we have 125 misiles also R-27R, which can't be used with the new upgraded radar. They are compatible with the older radar in MiG29B

The Russians will not give you. They do not make them an army that we were playing simulation. >105km is for balistic range (30 000ft usa/ 10km altitude russia, 1 mach indicated speed (1800km/h). Balistic range for AIM-120C5 is >57nm(105km), AIM-B >40nm, R-27ER >130km, R-27R 80km, R-77 base line 100km, RVV-SD 140km. AIM-120A is 35nm. Operationally, this value is ignored. In battle no one gonna fly that. True, did not enter series production but the RVV-SD is made! It is not just a project. I am not a supporter of FC to put something that is not in operational use.

MiG-29S is more advanced than the Su-27SK. MiG-29A/B/G are at the level with the Su-27SK. MiG-29S/SMT=Su-27SM/SM3 https://www.dropbox.com/s/qx3lgbscrrt82oj/MR1235.chap9.pdf This is not like a direct line EWR-Su27, but this is a good network. One more thing, exists direct DATA link connection between two Su 27 in a smaller range, independently from the guidance center.

Because this version Su27SK no data link for the guidance ARH and a 3D projection of the radar N-001. Only 2D!