jojo

Ok, throw your numbers then, what range do you expect with what launching parameters for Super 530D ? But your Nasa slide is for a very different missile with much shorter range. There is no meaningful range gain excepted in almost vertical dive. And keep in mind these are launching ranges, not missile travel range.

Look at the Vertical Launch on this one: http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-7F_Sparrow_III_SMC_-_January_1977.pdf You don't gain much if any in shoot down. But in shoot up from sea level, your missile going up will have increased range because of lower air density.

The problem with slide you are referring to is that it’s a short range missile test. In horizontal flight that’s just 4 000m range at 6 000m altitude. If you are shooting from 6000m to at a target at sea level and just 2000m ahead of you, that’s a hell of a steep dive (72°). So off course here the gravity is helping the missile. When I’m shooting from 20 000ft to a target at 1 000ft, and the missile travels for 9Nm, that’s just 19° dive angle. I will add that “drag defence” (turning cold and diving) is a valid defensive tactic against any missile in game, and in any flight simulator I have been playing with missiles. So it would mean that absolutely everyone is wrong on this aspect.

I wasn’t comparing to AIM-7, I meant that in game the missile doesn’t reach advertised top speed. Shot at M1.6 it barely reaches M4.2, it’s +2.6. I think it should be more. But if you increase top speed alone, you will increase range. And the maximum ranges are not that bad compared to open source data. And I disagree with you on that point. I don’t think that kinetic energy and gravity will overcome drag in shoot down. In you graph, the Cd is never negative, minimum for Cl = 0 is 0.4 at M6.0

Look at your missiles range table. From 30 000ft to 50 000ft you get more than double the range. From 30 000ft to 10 000ft you get less than half the range So if you travel up, you will gain range.(loft profile) If you travel down you will loose range. In high performance launch we can’t get the maximum out of Super 530D because of self destruction at 45 seconds. Above FL200 the missile will self destruct at supersonic speed. Below it will slow down <M1.0 before 45s. I don’t know for sure if the speed profile is accurate enough ? The top speed seems lower than advertised (barely M4.2 when shot at M1.6). So I tend to think that the missile should have higher acceleration to reach higher speed. But on the other hand, the range seems good compared to available open source data. So maybe it should also have ate the same time: - higher thrust & top speed - higher drag.

It seems you are new to the module, maybe you should ask questions in the main section of the forum before making bug reports :smilewink:

Do you select EXT option on top line of PCA ? :music_whistling:

Last test, target at the same altitude at 35 000ft, I'm flying M1.62. This one is a fail as the missile self destruct after 45 seconds of flight, but it's interesting as we can see we get better performances by going up +30 000ft than staying at the same altitude. The thing is the real Super 530D has loft profile, but not in DCS. However we should be able to loft manually by pitching up.

Snap down test. I'm flying @ M0.9/ 20 000ft. Target is MiG-25RBT @ M0.9/ 1 000ft. Again, no evasive action from the target. - First shot @ 20Nm. The missile impact after 42 seconds of flight, terminal velocity = M0.85 (so in this case, 20Nm is almost Rmax1). Missile doesn't have much energy left, any maneuver will easily defeat the missile. - Second shot @ 13.6Nm. The missile impact after 27 seconds of flight, terminal velocity = M1.3 (so higher PK shot)

I don’t think so. The increase in drag will be greater than the dive benefit when engaging targets at low altitude. Overall, the ranges at high and low altitude for targets at the same level are in line with what we could expect. The snap up scenario is fine too. I don’t see any reason to seriously doubt about the shoot down range.

I'm not sure about how much range do you expect in shoot down situation ? You seem to think that if we get 40km range in high altitude, we should get more in shoot down situation. But the missile will only burn for 1/4th of its flight time, and even if going down hill, it will be flying in more dense air. So the drag will increase. The here is a huge drag difference between FL400 and up, and 200ft AGL... In game it's the same thing for AIM-54 which has tremendous range in high altitude but much less in low altitude (even if it's still better than anything else).

Yes :D

Here is a test I did. Target is MiG-25RBT flying @ M2.4/ 65 500ft (can't set much higher in ME). IA set to ignore threat. I'm flying @ M1.6/ 35 000ft. Firing at 37Nm with +10° nose up attitude (compared to previous test, it does help a little bit). The missile does catch up +30500ft (+9300m), flies for roughly 20.5Nm (38km) during 42.5 seconds. Considering that in Matra publication, the shot is taken at 15 000m/ 49 000ft, I think we are pretty close. :smilewink:

Then take off with 4 Magic and never turns radar on :music_whistling:

Of course you cut the following sentence where I already said that. But if you are pressing a Fox 3 shooter that tries to recommit on you, and you have your 2 x Super 530D, you should do it or run home and land ASAP.

In BVR, try to keep speed around M0.9 to maintain high energy. You can dash to M1.2-M1.4 to increase missile PK. You have to make a compromise between flight profile and weapon system use. You will get better missile energy if you shoot from above, but the target will break your lock by beaming. I prefer to engage at the same altitude then dive to keep the target above horizon. A shot in look up is much more dangerous. IRL it would be group tactics to defeat enemy situational awareness. And that’s where Link 16 comes into play, and the game isn’t fair anymore (but is shouldn’t be anyway). So it’s best to choose servers which try to set a specific time frame with limited Fox 3 use. If you play on full options servers and alone...you are at serious disadvantage. You need to plug to human GCI/ AWACS, be ready to run out, use sneaky tactics to engage targets that are not expecting you. MAV mode for the Magic can save your ass by acting like IRST (click on MAG button on PCA). Unfortunately, radar to Magic slave doesn’t really work yet. Depending on tactical situation, shooting a Super 530D to force the target on defensive is perfectly valid tactic. But you can’t play that game for a long time with only 2 Fox 1.

Here is real worl BLG66 delivery, but I think that target explosion is special effect :D In fact, with Mirage 2000C you don’t just choose a weapon, you also choose the attack profile at the same time.:smilewink: So it isn’t as flexible as US fighters.

In fact, AIM-7F and later compared to Super 530D would have similar practical ranges. But the speed profile is different. You can reach the same range with more or less the same average speed but different top depending on your thrust profile and drag. The Super 530D burns for 10 to 11 seconds. The AIM-7F and later burns for 16 seconds. Indeed the body diameter has an impact. From DGA historical publication, industry wanted to reduce Super 530F diameter compared to R530, but French Air Force preferred to keep the same diameter to lower technological risk. At the time of Super 530F development they were worried about high and fast targets. The body diameter has less impact in that scenario (look at AIM-54 shape, not really narrow body either). Then they realised they were lagging behind in look down/ shoot down. Mirage 2000C was developed with still high and fast target in minds, but adding look down/ shoot down. And to be fair, we were late to the party compared to F-4J and F-15A. The Thomson CSF RDI radar was new and took a little longer than expected time to develop. The Super 530D was an upgrade from Super 530F (new seeker and more impulse in the engine). The M53 engine was adapted from a project for twin engine heavy weight fighter. It was developed after the Pratt & Whitney - SNECMA TF306.

From memory, the cross appears above 520kt, but it doesn't prevent from releasing bombs. However I would rather advise level flight at 200ft-300ft/ AGL & 500kt for CCIP attack. :smilewink:

Go have a look on Chuck guide. There are tables for optimum climb profiles. These are for MIL power. I'am a little bit skeptical about you theory of flying super high to overcome AIM-120. This flight profile will give AIM-120 tremendous range against you. And that high you won't be able to manoeuvre well, you will quickly deplete energy as soon as you turn. AIM-120 has greater range than Super 530D. Apart from confusing their situational awareness to get in range, I don't really see a solution. Going high and fast to go unobserved can be a trick, but not alone in one Vs one. And it's more difficult now against Fox 3 shooters with L16 and AWACS support. Finally, the Mirage 2000C isn't meant to compete with Fox 3 shooters post 2005. All Mirage 2000 clients are allied or in good term with NATO. From 1997-1999 Mirage 2000-5F with Fox 3 Mica was in service, but not yet in DCS.

If these are 2 enemies, just lock one and shoot one Super 530D anyway, I bet they won't stay that close.:D

This is counter intuitive when used to US designation system, but Super 530D is more modern and efficient than Super 530F :smilewink: F stands for Mirage F1 D stands for Doppler, like RDI radar (Radar Doppler Impulsion). M53 engine was designed for a M2.5+/ M3 interceptor project that was dropped (MD.750). So yes, it was meant to fly high and fast.

Fly with a wingman. Stick together. If available, plug to human GCI with SRS, this is awesome.

You have to turn ON the IFF interrogator and use HOTAS command to trigger the interrogation. You can do it before or after lock. You have symbols on radar screen and HUD. And you can IFF at long range. Read the manual :book:

I have lost wings in single player to MiG-29 turbulence. There are videos on YouTube of F-16 loosing wings. The G read out has been seen up to 25G.:joystick: Wake turbulences are just a bad joke and ED is playing deaf on the subject.:cry: