S530 Range

[il_corleone]

Managed to take out a Mig 25 at 20 Miles!

 

Works like a charm when Mach 1.5 and above 30.000 feet

[Zeus67]

That's not completely true, you can still do some pretty hard maneuvering as long as you stay within the radar gimbal limits, when the radar is finalized of course. Right now with the fixed radar cone you're absolutely right.

 

That is a moot question in STT. In STT the antenna tries to keep the target at its center up to the gimbal limits.

[Brisse]

Did some testing with the Super 530D against a Tu-142 flying head on at Mach 0.6 at 10 000m ASL.

 

I was in the M-2000C at same altitude. I tested at different speeds, increasing the launch speed every time to try and stretch out as much range as possible from the missile. At Mach 1.9-2.0 I could launch at around 37km (21nm) and hit my target. The missiles top speed would then be about Mach 3.7, but it would slow down so much before impact that the launch platform flying at Mach 2 would overtake the missile before it hit it's target. I had to almost look backwards to see the impact :)

 

I have seen some sources state 37km and Mach 3.7 so according to that it seems to be working good in the sim. The only thing I noticed was some sources say "propulsion time 8 sec" while the one in DCS seem to burn for 10 sec.

 

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/super_530D.htm

 

Edit: Some sources also state Mach 4.5 as top speed. I was able to achieve that by going all the way up to the M-2000's service ceiling at 18 000m and launching at Mach 1.94 which was pretty much as fast as possible. Seems they did a pretty good job on this Super 530D after all. I know there's been some criticism and that it's low altitude performance is disappointing, but perhaps that is how it's supposed to be. I haven't found any evidence to prove them wrong.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Brisse

[TomCatMucDe]

Brisse you might be right, but then the other in grams missiles are not correctly simulated. I can't believe that the 530D is worse than the AIM7

[Brisse]

Brisse you might be right, but then the other in grams missiles are not correctly simulated. I can't believe that the 530D is worse than the AIM7

 

Well, I haven't really done any serious comparisons although that would be interesting. One thing I can say is that the AIM-7M retains speed much better after the rocket burns out. It does have a slimmer profile though. The Super 530D has 60mm more to it's diameter compared to AIM-7M.

 

Edit: Did the same thing with the AIM-7M. Same conditions as before except I was in an F-15C which doesn't really matter. I managed to score a kill at just under 50km (27nm) which is actually the "wikipedia-range" for the AIM-7M :)

Some things I noted: Slower acceleration and top speed. Burns about 15 seconds which means it's travelled a lot further than the Super 530D when it's rocket burns out (even though it's top speed is less), and after that it glides pretty good, not loosing speed as fast as the Super 530D.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Brisse

[Kev2go]

yeah a little disappointed with the 530d. It does feel somewhat underwhelming compared to the aim7m.

 

Seems like it cant maneuver quite as good and looses speed much faster once its out of propellant compared to the aim7.

 

Not too impressed with the Magic 2 either. It feels like a heavier draggier shorter ranged Aim9m.

 

 

I really hope that its just these missiles are in beta, and are going to be fixed, that this isnt their intended final 100% finished form

[Brisse]

I agree, the Super 530D is underwhelming, but I think that's the way it's going to be. It's reflecting what we know about it's real life performance.

 

The Magic 2 on the other hand is wrong I think. Pretty sure they messed up the drag curve on that one. It's shape is similar to an R-73, and yet it seems to have waaaay more drag in DCS at the moment. That's for another thread though. This one is for Super 530D :)

[ttaylor0024]

I agree, the Super 530D is underwhelming, but I think that's the way it's going to be. It's reflecting what we know about it's real life performance.

 

The Magic 2 on the other hand is wrong I think. Pretty sure they messed up the drag curve on that one. It's shape is similar to an R-73, and yet it seems to have waaaay more drag in DCS at the moment. That's for another thread though. This one is for Super 530D :)

 

Launched a 530D , 2.4mi, at mach 1 chaing a MiG-21 also going mach 1. It ran out of steam and fell short. 2.4mi. Underwhelming is an understatement.

[Bacab]

Launched a 530D , 2.4mi, at mach 1 chaing a MiG-21 also going mach 1. It ran out of steam and fell short. 2.4mi. Underwhelming is an understatement.

I think it was designed to take down heavy bombers flying high, not fast moving jet fighter.

[jojo]

Launched a 530D , 2.4mi, at mach 1 chaing a MiG-21 also going mach 1. It ran out of steam and fell short. 2.4mi. Underwhelming is an understatement.

 

What altitude please ?

[il_corleone]

I think it was designed to take down heavy bombers flying high, not fast moving jet fighter.

 

The 530D Is very very effective in some parameters, out of them is useless

 

I use it always above 30.000 feet and above Mach 1.5, it usually take targets at 20 miles

The ECM and chaff does much damage to this missile but so far, but in this targets fall very well with it at this height (maybe the lack of modern ECM or even ECM on them)

 

Mig 15

Mig 23

Mig 21

Mig 25

Il-76/78

Su24

 

In the weeds and 10.000 Feet, the missile range is 10 miles at most, but is used as a weapon to have the enemy busy, look at my video

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPwWvW0L648[/ame]

 

You can hold your back with it if needed, if not, you can also take out targets.

 

The window of targets you can take out easily its from the 50,s to the 70,s

You need to see yourself as a "Launching plataform" always going faster, rolls that is the advantage of the M 2000 can be used for evading missiles at high speed.

[TomCatMucDe]

There is something I don't understand. The radar guides the 530D, so if it s spoofed by Chaff and ECM, it's the radar that's too weak, not the missile. Am I getting it wrong?

[il_corleone]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTgLbRT5fyQ&feature=youtu.be[/ame]

 

A test I made this morning against a Mig 23

 

I hit him at 21 Miles, his missile never hit me.

I was launching chaff when I saw his shoot, but S530 is very fast, and the chaff didnt harm it

The moment to shoot is when the Circle enters on the Square, not on the "DMZ" zone

 

My Radar presets were.

30 Degrees Scan

Target memory on the right

Used the RDO mode on the PCA to lock the target

 

When the target try to evade it, I roll it to keep him at above my horizon

Edited December 29, 2015 by il_corleone

[Brisse]

There is something I don't understand. The radar guides the 530D, so if it s spoofed by Chaff and ECM, it's the radar that's too weak, not the missile. Am I getting it wrong?

 

Think of the radar beam sort of like a flash-light. The further away from the emitter you get, the wider the beam becomes. If you are at BVR ranges, the beam will be wide enough to illuminate both the target and the chaff. The seeker in the missile will see noise from the chaff, and must be able to distinguish the target from the chaff to successfully intercept the target.

[jojo]

That's the point. It's shoot down missile. So it uses doppler filters.

 

What would be the chaff's Doppler shift ? :music_whistling:

[TomCatMucDe]

S530 Range

 

Think of the radar beam sort of like a flash-light. The further away from the emitter you get, the wider the beam becomes. If you are at BVR ranges, the beam will be wide enough to illuminate both the target and the chaff. The seeker in the missile will see noise from the chaff, and must be able to distinguish the target from the chaff to successfully intercept the target.

 

 

Yes sure, I meant, the complaint shouldn't be about the missile. or let me put in this way: you can't say that the missile is sensitive to chaff cause the radar is. If we observe that the radar is more prone to beaming than other mods, then it's either a RAZBAM problem or a radar limitation.

[IASGATG]

Conditions as before except I was in an F-15C which doesn't really matter. I managed to score a kill at just under 50km (27nm) which is actually the "wikipedia-range" for the AIM-7M :)

 

Just like to point out that the USN range for the AIM-7F is 57nmi head to head. :)

[il_corleone]

Just like to point out that the USN range for the AIM-7F is 57nmi head to head. :)

 

Well, in DCS every missile drags like if it had a chute :lol:

[ttaylor0024]

What altitude please ?

 

On the deck

 

I think it was designed to take down heavy bombers flying high, not fast moving jet fighter.

 

I find it very hard to believe it can't take out a non-maneuvering target on the deck at 2.4mi...

[IASGATG]

I don't think anyone would dispute that the R-27ER should have less drag than the 530D. The exact numbers are probably closer than we think but in that ballpark. Anyone tried shooting the 530D with the R-27ER's drag curve just for a laugh? Or the R-27? OR the AIM-7M?

 

(fyi, diameter not such a big deal in supersonic flight)

[tflash]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTgLbRT5fyQ&feature=youtu.be

 

A test I made this morning against a Mig 23

 

I hit him at 21 Miles, his missile never hit me.

I was launching chaff when I saw his shoot, but S530 is very fast, and the chaff didnt harm it

The moment to shoot is when the Circle enters on the Square, not on the "DMZ" zone

 

My Radar presets were.

30 Degrees Scan

Target memory on the right

Used the RDO mode on the PCA to lock the target

 

When the target try to evade it, I roll it to keep him at above my horizon

 

Well I must say I have similar experience in single player: I play the same mission, first with 2 * Mirage against 2* Mig-21, then with 2* SU-27 against 2* Mig-21. I played both missions several times, then looked at them in TacView.

 

The results: very strange, but on average I have a better score with the Mirage than with the SU-27 (I mean, I need more missiles with the SU-27 and the fight takes longer).

 

1/ I can shoot from farther using SU-27, but the Migs 90% of the time manage to chaff away my R-27ER.

 

2/ The AI Migs start dropping chaff earlier when painted by SU-27 then when painted by Mirage, which gives me more time to close in with the Mirage for a perfect Super 530 kill head-on at quite a close range, often 3-4 miles, on the first bandit.

 

3/ The migs do engage me (too late) with their R-3S when I fly the Mirage, and I can very easily chaff this away.

 

4/ I get painted by the Mig earlier in the SU-27: larger RCS ? which forces me to manoevre more

 

5/ In the ensuing dogfight with the second Mig (since my AI wingman is useless as usual) I really see no big differences between Magic and R-73, in all cases I fire them from very close in the bandit's six, a place where you get in no time both with SU-27 as well as Mirage. I even have a higher tally with Magic then with R-73 thus far.

 

But then again, all in single player. In multiplayer this should be dramatically different, since a.o.:

 

1/ you do not know who the bandits are in the Mirage and where they come from;

2/ the human bandits can be surprised with a medium range IR shot, while the AI will always release perfectly timed flares since they have omniscient SA. My guess is that in multiplayer you will more often fire an IR missile from longer range, say 3-4 miles or so?

[il_corleone]

Well I must say I have similar experience in single player: I play the same mission, first with 2 * Mirage against 2* Mig-21, then with 2* SU-27 against 2* Mig-21. I played both missions several times, then looked at them in TacView.

 

The results: very strange, but on average I have a better score with the Mirage than with the SU-27 (I mean, I need more missiles with the SU-27 and the fight takes longer).

 

1/ I can shoot from farther using SU-27, but the Migs 90% of the time manage to chaff away my R-27ER.

 

2/ The AI Migs start dropping chaff earlier when painted by SU-27 then when painted by Mirage, which gives me more time to close in with the Mirage for a perfect Super 530 kill head-on at quite a close range, often 3-4 miles, on the first bandit.

 

3/ The migs do engage me (too late) with their R-3S when I fly the Mirage, and I can very easily chaff this away.

 

4/ I get painted by the Mig earlier in the SU-27: larger RCS ? which forces me to manoevre more

 

5/ In the ensuing dogfight with the second Mig (since my AI wingman is useless as usual) I really see no big differences between Magic and R-73, in all cases I fire them from very close in the bandit's six, a place where you get in no time both with SU-27 as well as Mirage. I even have a higher tally with Magic then with R-73 thus far.

 

But then again, all in single player. In multiplayer this should be dramatically different, since a.o.:

 

1/ you do not know who the bandits are in the Mirage and where they come from;

2/ the human bandits can be surprised with a medium range IR shot, while the AI will always release perfectly timed flares since they have omniscient SA. My guess is that in multiplayer you will more often fire an IR missile from longer range, say 3-4 miles or so?

 

I can confirm this, the S530D missile is a high height weapon and faster than the ER, so this may interfere with this on having more suceed and kills.

In MP we must relay in others, never fight alone, like in a F15 or a Su27, from what I saw, 530D are very very effective at this height

[King_Hrothgar]

Below are a series of missile tests I performed this morning. I did get some probable bugs in the videos too. As an added bonus, Magic deceleration also shown in the final video.

 

 

 

[il_corleone]

That are a bunch of very good test! Thank you King!

[RuskyV]

Ive done a test myself and extracted and added foot notes to the telemetry from a shot on a Mig 23 at 6nm with zero aspect and non manouvering

 

 

Here is a comparison shot from an Aim7m

 

 

I know this is not a 100% fair test as i know there is bit of a technology gap between the two missiles and you can take into account weight and diameter of the missiles to be different, but the terminal phase of the missile where the motor is no longer providing propulsion (where the missile is effectively gliding) is huge compared to the 530D. Taking into account the diffrences above i think you can see there is an awful lot less resistance than there is for the 530D.

 

I can't tell you whether this is right or wrong as im not a subject expert but with the comparison in terminal phases of each missiles i can only draw one conclusion and that the 530D has much much more drag than the aim7m (all above considered)

Edited December 29, 2015 by (504)Blade
Added aim7m comparison shot