cauldron

Where does the file go? What is JSGME?

Actually RAZBAM[Zeus] has stated their "in house tester" is incredibly upset with the state of the missile, and that they need to demonstrate hard numbers to get ED to change its state it currently is in. Maybe this would be a good opportunity to help them ... come up with the right numbers so the Matra missiles are more than aerodynamic wiffle balls.

Thanks for the clarification. Zeus did mention it was going to be functional as it was an option for the plane.

I liked the part where it states - that considerably important that the missile can deal with fast and low targets... something the missile can do at less than 2NM in DCS at the moment... greater than ~1NM it can't catch a MIG21 that's running from it... so much for BVR. <--- last statement not scientific but observational only.... but its in the ballpark - the Missile is not worthy of its weight on the pylon at the moment in DCS...imo. The only kills i've made PvP are using CQC modes on the radar looking down from above {approx 45deg dive} on my target and launching. Or a head on in TWS until the last second and switch from PID to PIC and fire... missile in my exp in game vs PvP is that it can't hit anything beyond its engine burn time.

i added the assumption of same aero properties... GG THaros would you happen to know if the missile MOD is compatible with the M2000c module?

I believe that a denser object loses inertia in ballistics slower than a less dense object, your analysis shows under non-powered flight the 530 would lose speed faster than the AIM7 given you are taking fuel expended weights into consideration. Assuming similar aero properties of course.

Not sure of the author accuracy but here goes: A Compendium of Armaments and Military Hardware (Routledge Revivals) By Christopher Chan. Page 538:

Above are the pics...thanks.

Forgive my image skillz ...:cry: In following up on the D2M sensors on our M2000c module i made these images and found some antennas-pods- unknown to me. Also the center line dual rack seems off center and may be causing a roll moment...

I,ve seen in the ingame model on the back of the rearward inboard pylons what looks like some D2M detectors, but also centerline rear underneath just forward of the turkey-feathers, and two similar sensors on the trailing edge of the vertical stabilizer behind the chaff dispenser, arranged one just above the other. Could a dev or someone positively identify these sensors? In a similar line of questions which are the small double half-cylinders just lateral on each side of the engine turkey-feathers for? I've seen them in pictures as well as the in game model... and even have "danger" labels on them. cheers!

IASGATG... Is your MOD currently viable for the M2000c module? thanks, i'm relatively new to DCS and i'm totally impressed by your Missile work. Also, at 40,000ft shouldn't the missile achieve MACH 5 ? I always heard this missile to be touted as MACH 5 to reduce reaction time...am i wrong?

From my experience in jets: Take off Power settings are predicated on Safety 1st, all else secondary. For avoiding engine failure a de-rated -nonAB - or Assumed temp setting is better, but if you do that too much you suffer performance issues that bring you back to square ONE "safety 1st" Also, rolling resistance gets HUGH, ie. very very bad... the faster you go, so at approximately 15deg up the engine thrust is helping the aircraft get "wheels up" earlier, thus "safer" Remember you want to be airborne as fast as possible but within acceptable engine failure risk and engine wear rate, because if your engine fails you want runway to be able to stop before its gone. Bird strikes are a risk at low altitude in the air, not on the ground and the faster you go the less chance the bird has to avoid you. They are actually pretty good at avoiding. Reminds me of a funny incident where a Pelican barely manage to not hit my plane - it was one of those where i could see the birds thoughts ... 1st "oh shit a plane!" left, no right, no oh crap Dive Dive Dive... it lived to fly home... Pelican strike would have been bad at 300 knots ;) Anyways i digress...but if i could guess as to why the M2000 it is SOP for the AB on always its to avoid rolling resistance from killing its take off. My two cents.

-to nit-pick....there are exceptions ;) Canard Deltas have their TE surfaces act as Ailerons/Elevators & Flaps in conjunction with LE slats and of course the Canards - all controlled by the FBW. For take off and landing and, for most maneuvering they configure to provide Positive Lift vectors as apposed to standard ailerons which provide negative lift.

We Do, well at least i do - VERY MUCH. The M2000c may not be the most powerful plane to fly in DCS but for me its the most fun to "fly", i especially love flying at altitude - For instance i've had some absolutely spectacular combats vs Su-30's at 35,000Feet where missiles and planes are all leaving contrails... thank you Razbam! Oh and KUdos for whoever put the "tiger eye" livery as a bonus, very pretty. P.S. ? where did you find that Carl Sagan Quote, I love to read all things Carl Sagan and have not come across that quote, unless i missed it ;) ?

Wow, that explains why i stay on someones tail, for seemingly minutes and can't get a f**king tone! lol. thanks!

Before any more comments about "feelings" check your data scientifically vs the charted flight envelopes, so far they seem to be quite close to the charts - whatever my feelings may be.

When the Beta release is out, depending on initial docs, i'll try to document and post here flight envelope data as best as i can test fly it. My eyesight is not as it used to be, ie. can't fly anymore but i can on the pc :), but i'll try to get as good test data as i can. Anyone would be welcome to join.

JoJo, Please do not assume the worst, nor assume things that have not occurred. I have been careful to make the distinction between game, BMS DCS and iRL. I invite you to discuss your passion about this plane, talk about its FM IRL if you want, or whatever. Just be constructive to the debate/dialog. thank you.

Ok... I don't know you, nor the context of each of your statements, the Doc is by J.M. LANGERON, who would "Topolo" be a reference to? Which flight model do you refer to? DCS M2000 or BMS, are you a tester and debugger for DCS M2000 or BMS or what? and what is your point? I'll try to follow you but throw me a bone please ;) Edit: Honestly can we try to talk about the plane and its systems and characteristics. JoJo, Be it as it may be you may be involved with sims past or present, in no way does that allow you to actively troll this thread as if i am bitching or complaining about getting ANYTHING ahead of the time to when its ready. I have posted clearly in several posts here that is not the case. Take the time to read the posts to see your misunderstanding. I am asking you to refrain from any additional "cock waving" and to be constructive. There is no need to make such comments as to BETA this alpha that or early release parts of the module - Also inane comments like "wait like the rest of us"... comments which are out of place, and out of order in this thread so far. If you have been involved with any of these FM's than you should be actively discussing aspects of the aircraft. Do not PM again berating me for bitching or whining or complaining that i don't have this to look at, as it is CLEARLY written as not my intention. Maybe English is not your first language, and i for being multi language speaker can understand how you may have come to err. But please stop trolling this thread as it is a genuine effort to discuss possible docs to be added to the module and or a discussion to talk about the plane itself.

Copy of PDF from docs falconbms mod Here is the example that i refer to... please look at and comment. Cheers. FMs Falcon4 M2k v5.1.pdf

F-86 Sabre F-86 would be my choice if i win. Thank you.

That you take it my OP as wierdly demanding is... wierd, but still whatever. Demanding it is not - a question it is, questions usually imply an answer that's to be expected, no harm there - that's it. The context that learning to fly a plane already made/designed necessitates the passing on of the flight and weapon characteristics, not just a checklist or instrument panel label etc, which are needed - but so are the charts. My question is in regard to just how in depth will it go, a bit or a lot. The Link however does NOT answer the question. "the manual" is not an answer to what documentation may come to be published for the module... Flight Envelopes, charts & graphs, missile and bomb envelopes etc could hardly be answered with a short comment that "the manual" is being worked on, the link points to where the devs were answering an entirely different line of question. My question assumes a "manual" would be worked on, the question is what might we be getting by official release of the module. M2000 threads are packed full of detailed debate and conversation over many details of the sim - radar autopilot - missiles - bombs - ecm - etc why not a single discussion over documentation. I guess no one is interested in reading about the plane they want to fly. I'll give you an example. In Falcon BMS in their published charts it shows that for certain non-heavy loads the M2000 can supercruise. Its a pocket where under certain weights and altitudes it can sustain supecruise, it can't get there without AB but once there it works, try it in game and it works. That could never be found if that doc was never published. Does it help in game? you bet it does! Also the M2000 has some performance penalties across the trans sonic regime, so you should either stay below .9 or above 1.1, does it make a difference maneuvering in game? you bet it does! get the idea? This is what i want to talk about, and i am curious as to whether the DCS M2000C have docs so we can read and LEARN about the good and bad aspects of the plane system. How good is roll rate? at all altitudes and speeds or AoA's? or just some.?? Can the M2000C struggle in sustained turn vs transitory turn rate? what about fuel burn rates at speeds and altitudes? all these things come from the Flight model built for the plane... so back again to the OP... the threads are full of discussion on M2000C vs this plane or that... reading about the FM helps to understand how to fly the plane. All successful aces always have said the same thing, know your plane, know its limits, learn to fly to them adn at them, and know your adversary's limits as well. its what we do when we go into matches with these planes, why gimp yourself before hand? it like seeing a flight student walking to the flight line having not studied a dam, about that days flight, but he got his TopGun shades on and has the strut down pat... to bad it getting dark... get the point? So please lets talk shop... lets talk flight envelopes, lets talk and learn... not skim jump to conclusions or act brazen when its not needed. Remember that "We are all the same, we just land at different airfields" ;) So please, lets not ignore the capabilities nor the falabilities of the M2000C, so we can fly them like true aces, and not a band dummies.

Will Flight Manuals, and more specifically flight envelope charts and graphs be included in the release? While waiting for DCS release a friend told me that Falcon BMS has flyable M2000's so i tried it and yes, it has its own flight model apparently and they have some flight envelope charts which are helpful for understanding your aircraft. IMO all sim releases should have documentation in regard to the planes flight envelope and characteristics. Would any air force let you fly a plane without being trained in it? no... so. Please could you give us a heads up on plane and weapon documentation that will be included in the release? If a dev could answer would be appreciated, or someone in the know....thank you.

If 1.5 just this last Friday got patched with missiles that only the M2000-C has... i think its a safe bet it will be out for 1.5 as well.