AdrianJ

Hats off to P*Funk a true gent.

LJQCN101 Fantastic, at first I thought my calculations were wrong. Then I realised this data is MK82 with the fins for LGB. I used Mk82 and these are my results. All the mil results are using an AoA of 1deg, and I'm using the standard day values. 350ktas 3000ft 7993ft 359mils 13.72s: error +190ft, -8mils 150ktas 6000ft 4859ft 890mils 19.39s: error +56ft, -6mils 350ktas 6000ft 11272ft 507mils 19.44s: error +356ft, +5mils 150ktas 15000ft 7663ft 1116mils 30.76s: error +154ft, +10mils 350ktas 15000ft 17770ft 719mils 30.84s: error +812ft, -5mils It would be fantastic if you had some old info on the Mk82AIR, but thanks very much this is the first time I've been able to test my program with real data.

Ok I'm sorry if I've said the wrong thing, but could you tell me if I'm close. Mk82AIR Flight path 0deg, 280kts, 300ft release. 4,78 sec TOF, Range 1501ft, Slant Range 1527ft. Honestly I wasn't having a go at anybody, I was just trying to help, now I'm trying to learn.

Err I didn't give him any reputation I was just trying to help him. As far as I see it, there are three ways you would know the ballistic properties were wrong, 1. You have access to actual weapons data. I think this is unlikely. 2. The values displayed in the HUD are so far out of wack that it's clear there's a problem. They look ok to me. 3. The calculation that he uses doesn't match what's shown in the HUD. I assume this is the problem. This is why I asked how are you calculating resistance, I've been using air resistance times velocity squared. How are you calculating it?

Whats wrong with the ballistic properties, how do you calculate the resistance?

Oh no, before it was easy. Red fires then do something or you'll be hit, and your missile will be trashed. Now when Red fires I'm going to start looking for Pink.

^^ heh heh I feel sorry for Blue as well, not only does he get hit but his poor missile gets trashed.

I'm just trying to learn things, I haven't said anyone’s right or wrong, I tried to give you the history of the laser guided bomb, and agreed with two different approaches to dropping them. I also think many people believe they can over fly the target and because the laser is firing the bomb still has guidance. The only reason I said it wasn't mandatory was in the sense that if your attacking a target and see another target, after completing the original attack just come around and attack the new target. Heads out of the cockpit the whole time, no need to add a waypoint. Like I said I'm just try to learn and think discussions like these are a great tool for doing that.

Well guys I would think one problem with laser guided weapons is over flying the target. The weapon is looking for the reflection of laser light if you over fly the target it won't receive the reflection any more. There should be completely no problem hitting a moving target, you don't have to release any differently than a normal dumb bomb. After all the laser guided bomb was developed to drop a bridge in Vietnam, before it was adopted by the Air Force it was demonstrated hitting moving tank targets. P*Funk, Yurgon is talking about a completely different theater of operation than the one your talking about. In your scenario you are operating above an active battlefield and air superiority hasn't been established yet. I would think laser guided bombs were an inappropriate weapon for this type of mission unless of course you have troops in contact who can provide the laser guidance. Yurgons scenario seems to me to be very much a Gulf War 1 mission, air superiority has been established but there is possibility of SAM systems still being operational. The whole target should be a waypoint discussion, my take on it yeah its probably good practice but definitely not mandatory. Very interesting reading this thread.

Funny you should mention this, last night I had Swiss Toni around for dinner. I know he'd flown A-10's so I asked him. Swiss whats it like to fly an A-10... you know what he answered, Well Paul flying the A-10 is like making love to a beautiful woman, treat her like a lady and if she has a manual then read it.....

These are absolutely fantastic so much detail, hats off. Top notch work.

Lars great work, keep it up. I'll be watching this thread with great interest.

+1 how many times does WildBillKelsoe have to apologize, I think there should be more humor on the forum. Sometimes I think were all so uptight it would be good if we had a hobby..... What about flying or flight sims ......

Well I don't know, DCS 2.0 isn't out yet so I expect DCS 126.0 to be a long time away.

Yeah I guess your right :thumbup: