GGTharos Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 Sorry but as far as missiles go, this always has been and always will be a BS argument. It uses the same 'tricks' that everyone else uses ie. lofting, high impulse all-boost propellant, guidance improvements etc. If the MICA uses some tricks to be better, be sure it is highly classified... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
sedenion Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 No, I mean the MICA was designed for a specific purpose, rather than competing for range with AMRAAM. It just doesn't have a chance of doing that unless it's using an UNHEARD of fuel fraction. Wishy-washy arguments like 'oh, just because it's a French missile it can't be better' aren't terribly good arguments against this. It's possible, but not plausible. The 120A has a 46kg propellant, at a weight of 150-160kg of missile. The MICA is a 112Kg missile, and the casing has to be a certain minimum thickness as well - so as you go down in size, you start losing economies of scale for some things. MICA is meant to be a light-weight missile that fills both BVR and WVR roles. As a result, a dedicated BVR missile will be better at BVR, and a dedicated SRM might be a better SRM. That's ok, but, the MICA is claimed to have a 60 to 80km range... So, you think it's a lie, or what ? Maybe, the MICA have something that make it a better propulsion/fuel ratio... i don't know, i'm not Matra ingeneer, but i think that if they say "60 to 80km", it because they are pretty sure it's a valide value.
GGTharos Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 I think that without knowing the altitude and target and shooter parameters the range has little meaning. I can claim amraam has 300km range if I dropped it from orbit. ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
sedenion Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 I think that without knowing the altitude and target and shooter parameters the range has little meaning. I can claim amraam has 300km range if I dropped it from orbit. ;) So you think they lies... okay...
dartuil Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 Interesting talks here. i7 2600k -- Noctua NH-D14--Asrock Z75 Pro3--ASUS GTX970 Strix --16Go Ripjaws X 1333--Thermaltake Smart M650--CoolerMaster Silencio 652S--AOC E2752VQ-- Sandisk Extreme II 480GB--Saitek X-52 Pro --SAITEK PZ35 Pedals
GGTharos Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 (edited) No, I think you don't understand the subject. In any case, on M2C you get R530 (the Super/F version I hope, which should be equivalent to AIM-7 in many respects) and Magic 2, IIRC. So you think they lies... okay... Edited April 2, 2015 by GGTharos [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Fer_Fer Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 (edited) No, I think you don't understand the subject. In any case, on M2C you get R530 (the Super/F version I hope, which should be equivalent to AIM-7 in many respects) and Magic 2, IIRC. I Think you mean the Super 530D which, to my limited knowledge, was the successor to the 530F Edited April 2, 2015 by Fer_Fer
GGTharos Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 Yes, you're right. I made the mistake of thinking that F would mean newer than D :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
dartuil Posted April 2, 2015 Posted April 2, 2015 Can a razbam member confirm or deny that mig-29 will be ported on DCS? I know F-15E will be but what about the mig-29? i7 2600k -- Noctua NH-D14--Asrock Z75 Pro3--ASUS GTX970 Strix --16Go Ripjaws X 1333--Thermaltake Smart M650--CoolerMaster Silencio 652S--AOC E2752VQ-- Sandisk Extreme II 480GB--Saitek X-52 Pro --SAITEK PZ35 Pedals
Paganus Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 It's been a long time, but I seem to recall a developer wanting to do the 29, but it was on ED's no go list.
SilentGun Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 ED was planning on the MiG-29 and I think they still are. Check the unofficial roadmap its listed as undetermined Link to my Imgur screenshots and motto http://imgur.com/a/Gt7dF One day in DCS... Vipers will fly along side Tomcats... Bugs with Superbugs, Tiffy's with Tornado's, Fulcrums with Flankers and Mirage with Rafales... :)The Future of DCS is a bright one:)
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Sorry but as far as missiles go, this always has been and always will be a BS argument. It uses the same 'tricks' that everyone else uses ie. lofting, high impulse all-boost propellant, guidance improvements etc. Sure? May be it has Warp Drive and we don't know as it is classified? ;) Edited April 3, 2015 by shagrat Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
silentconvo Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 Having a quick look around 50 km seems a commonly quoted maximum range for the MICA which sounds pretty reasonable given its size and weight making it a a short to medium range missile. Why not a long range? Probably has something to do with the plans for the Rafale to use the MBDA Meteor when it become available and that missile is anything but short ranged.
sedenion Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 ( Why it's so dificult to imagine that the MICA is more optimized in many ways ? Comparing size and weight tells nearly nothing, except if we start with the postulat "the AMRAAM/R-27 (or whatever) is the better configuration available in the world, and nothing can do better without a very bigger fuel ratio, which is just impossibruu according my knowledge !"... For example, get an american BIG cars, with a big fuel tank, big engine, big wheels, big everything. What is the engine's consumption / power ratio ? Compare it with an european SMALL car... I ended with this subject. )
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) It is not about who made "the better missile," at all. What GG Tharos is pointing at is that a brick of a certain weight and size, has a certain mass and drag. Say 1 kilogram at 10x10x25cm. So if a man hurls it away it may matters how strong the man is, but only to a few meters throwing distance maximum. What matters is, if one is standing on a 100 m building with a wind gust of 50mph from his back, as that would make the brick fly a larger distance. If the brick is 100gr less, has a different shape it influences the parameters, yes. Still it will be a roughly 1 kilogram brick hurled by a man. Given that the competitors are both reasonably string and trained, the throwing result will never be a consistent 20m more for one of the contestants... May be a meter or two, but no more... Edit: it is about physics, not who has the "bigger cochon...." ehrh, better missiles. ;) Edited April 3, 2015 by shagrat Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
sedenion Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) It is not about who made "the better missile," at all. What GG Tharos is pointing at is that a brick of a certain weight and size, has a certain mass and drag. Say 1 kilogram at 10x10x25cm. So if a man hurls it away it may matters how strong the man is, but only to a few meters throwing distance maximum. What matters is, if one is standing on a 100 m building with a wind gust of 50mph from his back, as that would make the brick fly a larger distance. If the brick is 100gr less, has a different shape it influences the parameters, yes. Still it will be a roughly 1 kilogram brick hurled by a man. Given that the competitors are both reasonably string and trained, the throwing result will never be a consistent 20m more for one of the contestants... May be a meter or two, but no more... That's not the original subjet, what you explain (and what i well understand) is what GGTharos say to justify that the claimed 60-80km range of the MICA is a kind of lie... the reality is: he just don't know, he guessed for the MICA a "small" range according it's size (diameter) and weight comparing to the AIM-120 and AIM-9... The AIM-54 is a big missile, its range is claimed at 180km... The AIM-120D, is a smaller missile, and is claimed with a range 50-160km, while the AIM-120A is claimed with range of 50-70km... What a magical thing ? No... it's just optimization, because of modernisation, etc... (And you see that the 120D is claimed 50-160km, which is a GREAT fork of range comparing to the 60-80km of the MICA which seem more realistic and not so "over-evaluated" according some very fortunate parameters of fire, as the 120D specification "50-160km" let guess.) Edited April 3, 2015 by sedenion
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 Well, you are both right in a way. The range claims may be from optimum parameters or average approximations or whatever parameters they had during testing, to theoretically computed maximums. We don't know. So may be AIM-120 range is possible with optimum parameters and MICA would far exceed the given range if fired under the same parameters? Fact is, if manufacturers use similar motors, fuel to ordnance ratio, missile by design have comparable drag and weight, the performance results can't be that much different, unless the designers of one missile made some stupid mistakes, which we can most certainly, be sure they don't. The MICA as far as i know (no subject matter expert here), was designed as a Medium Range AAM adding more range to the Mirages capabilities with less weight/drag than the 530 series. Similar the AIM-120 was intended as an alternative to the Sparrow and should be compatible with most US/NATO platforms as an addition to the AIM-9, yet they had a strong focus in more range... It seems in reality the 80-120km means theoretical range limit, rather than lethal range, which is more like 20-40km max? So the MICA most likely has a similar lethal range which means both missile perform quite the same, in the range that matters? Now, what use is the discussion about a theoretical maximum range that won't hit a 747 if it turns on a beaming course? If the MICA would be "far superior" in range and lethality, the NATO would equip their planes with MICAs and if the AIM-120 would be "far more superior" France would use them as a NATO partner. The Meteor LRAAM for example is likely to be deployed to all NATO partners, including the US... Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 Ah, and the AIM-54 Phoenix is a different story, as it has more fuel, due to its size. It has a pretty long range, yet isn't that agile. I think they put a pretty large warhead on it to cover a greater area in the explosion. Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
sedenion Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 If the MICA would be "far superior" in range and lethality, the NATO would equip their planes with MICAs Hem... no... never in this univers, the USA's directed NATO organisation would buy any french stuff. This is for sure impossible. Maybe they will "copy" the technology if they can, but never, NEVER buy french stuff. You don't well know the americans :D
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 The Meteor (partly French as well) is planned as a LRAAM for the F-22 to my knowledge, at least until US defense budgets can cope with developing their own... :D Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
sedenion Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) The Meteor (partly French as well) is planned as a LRAAM for the F-22 to my knowledge, at least until US defense budgets can cope with developing their own... :D Only because the meteor is an british/french cooperation INSIDE the European Union (USA's trojan horse) consortium (MBDA)... and, in fact, i think that will never happen. ( All is matter of geopolitics and economic domination with USA... but that's an totaly different subject ) Edited April 3, 2015 by sedenion
shagrat Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 The real issue is, US has laws, forbidding to buy defense stuff from non-US country, so they usually get the license to manufacture their own on US soil. Maybe that is where French government, does not approve. I know there was a discussion about the Leopard 2's Rheinmetall Cannon used on the M1A1, the US got the license to manufacture them, yet it replaced their own inferior cannon from the original M1... Shagrat - Flying Sims since 1984 - Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VPForce Rhino Base & VIRPIL T50 CM2 Stick on 200mm curved extension | VIRPIL T50 CM2 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
sedenion Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 The real issue is, US has laws, forbidding to buy defense stuff from non-US country The real issue is that USA have patriotic elites that defend their industry and defence's autonomy while in europe (and particularly in France) we have traitors subjected to the US domination but... i will stop here the discussion :D
super_baloo Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 It is useless to compare things without proper data, it is a sterile discussion. I don't believe the 2000C is a same class aircraft than SU27 and F15C especially when it comes to BVR. Mirage 2000 pilots will have to be smart to compete against them. A F16A would be a very good enemy though
silentconvo Posted April 3, 2015 Posted April 3, 2015 It is useless to compare things without proper data, it is a sterile discussion. I don't believe the 2000C is a same class aircraft than SU27 and F15C especially when it comes to BVR. Mirage 2000 pilots will have to be smart to compete against them. A F16A would be a very good enemy though Or people could make some multiplayer missions restricting weapons to the mid-late 1980s so the 2000C has a bit more of a chance. Having some missions like that would be more fun generally, personally I don't find trying to dodge endless waves of 120s all that entertaining.
Recommended Posts