R550 Magic 2 performance

[Corsair]

The missile TOF appears to be 530 specific.

It's not a technical document. But it confirms what we think with common sense : the velocity indicated above the DLZ is a closing velocity. That's the most relevant information that has to he there (target speed would be useless displayed here), and it is the same on many other aircraft.

[Azrayen]

Also the long dash does not seem to suggest Rtr, just some sort of good shot parameters?

Well. Meilleur domaine de tir = Best shot enveloppe. :)

Not specific if Rtr or not.

[GGTharos]

I agree with you that it is on par with other aircraft, but again - it doesn't agree with the closure measurement (which may be inaccurate), and having the target TAS (or better yet, mach number) is quite useful when performing an intercept.

 

Anyway, all that aside, there is a discrepancy and we don't know why - if this is the closure, then the target seems to be flying a TAS of about 350KTAS, which is close to 250IAS at that altitude and that's fine.

[Rlaxoxo]

R550 Magic 2 vs Aim 9M - Performance test

 

Made a little video to demonstrate the difference between the Magic 2 and Aim 9M

 

Here you go

 

[ame]

[/ame]

 

In the middle part of the video I've done tests at 3,000/6,000/10,000 Meters

 

Performance doesn't change much

Edited January 6, 2016 by Rlaxoxo

[mattebubben]

Good video.

 

And while the Aim-9M should have a slight range advantage over the Magic...

This is just absurd...

 

Yes the Magic is not a long range missile but as it is im pretty sure its the missile in the game with the shortest range.

 

even the R-60 and R3S have longer range...

 

Would not be suprised if a air-ground rocket did better when it came to speed / flight preformance...

 

Please ED you need to do something about both the Magic II and 530D.

 

While most missiles in the game are not perfect atleast bring the Magic II and 530D up to standard.

Edited January 6, 2016 by mattebubben

[RoflSeal]

It goes from 2965kmh to 1797kmh in 3 seconds (48s to 51s). That's 42G deceleration lol

[gospadin]

It goes from 2965kmh to 1797kmh in 3 seconds (48s to 51s). That's 42G deceleration lol

 

This. Even if it was tumbling, it wouldn't slow this quickly.

[jojo]

Accurate measurements on the video: the distance is decreasing 0.6NM in precisely 2.72s. This gives an average closure of 794KTAS.

 

Thanks.

 

Using standard atmosphere model, we have -28 degree Celsius at 23000ft.

Using a flight computer, 550kt CAS closure speed gives 798kt...

 

So I think we're good.

 

There is no point to argue if one doesn't understand difference between IAS/ CAS/ TAS.

 

Some other simulators allow you to switch the display value and see the difference. (at least CAS/ TAS)

[GGTharos]

Doppler will give you real closure though, not CAS or TAS.

[Tango3B]

Good video! All hard data put aside for a moment, absolutely everyone can see there is currently something really wrong with the R550 performance. Even the gimbal limits of the seeker head appear to be much worse than they should be (you can clearly see that at the end of the video in comparison to the AIM-9M btw). Also, the exhaust smoke by the rocket motor is a joke. The Magic II has about the same smoke output as the AIM-9M/L Sidewinder (visible in many test firings btw).

 

The Super530D does perform only slightly better. Although personally I agree with a pk of around 40% the low altitude performance can´t be close to the real thing. According to data from Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s one of the Super530D´s strengths was exactly the fact that it´s seeker head had good look down capability and a reasonable low-level pk. This is absolutely not true for the current missile in DCS. There is obviously much work to do...

[AussieGhost789]

Oh... wow! It seems to accelerate faster, but once that motor burns out it really puts the brakes on.

[Evilducky]

Must be using the Kh25ML coding.. ahaha

[jojo]

target's Mach number is displayed on radar screen, head down

[jojo]

Bon, je jette l'éponge, si quelqu'un veut prendre le relais... ça vire à l'enculage de mouche généralisé là...

 

Off course, you ask questions because you know nothing but you don't believe answers. And you're doing that on 2 forums now...

[Corsair]

Thanks.

 

Using standard atmosphere model, we have -28 degree Celsius at 23000ft.

Using a flight computer, 550kt CAS closure speed gives 798kt...

 

So I think we're good.

 

There is no point to argue if one doesn't understand difference between IAS/ CAS/ TAS.

 

Some other simulators allow you to switch the display value and see the difference. (at least CAS/ TAS)

 

Case closed then, mea culpa.

Any idea why the closure speed is given according to target's CAS, versus a real closure velocity ?

[GGTharos]

You want the closure in for pilot math ... target's CAS just doesn't matter in this case I think.

[Corsair]

I have been given a satisfactory explaination on another forum :

In case of an interception or a join up, you want to ajust you CAS in accordance with your closure sppeed, hence also given in CAS;

 

That makes sense, although you lose the real closure velocity information. Certainly a good compromise.

[GGTharos]

I've never really had that happen. Just knowing the closure allows me to adjust speed for a join-up, but it's mostly visual anyway.

 

Controlling an intercept is done via angles, and knowing closure may help with first cut - however in this case you're probably just using the mach number anyway ... I have never seen closure reported as CAS, it's simply not useful.

[Corsair]

C'est la vie ! :D

[sedenion]

Off course, you ask questions because you know nothing but you don't believe answers. And you're doing that on 2 forums now...

 

Yes, but the answer was given in such way that is hard to understand something... "CAS != TAS, but CAS == IAS with some little adjustement, but NOT according altitude/pressure ratio" would help me... and yes, a closure speed in CAS (aka "idealized IAS") was hard to beleive for me, sorry.

Edited January 6, 2016 by sedenion

[jojo]

I've never really had that happen. Just knowing the closure allows me to adjust speed for a join-up, but it's mostly visual anyway.

Controlling an intercept is done via angles, and knowing closure may help with first cut - however in this case you're probably just using the mach number anyway ... I have never seen closure reported as CAS, it's simply not useful.

 

It happens that there have been FAF fighters on QRA 24/7 for decades now.

 

A lot of liners cross over French airspace, and you don't choose when a liner experience radio or electric failure and you need to join up.

There is even a special radar mode to bring the Mirage in close formation to VID: "POL" = police.

At the end you're in range to light up the police light on left air intake and VID, even at night :smilewink:

[Slipp]

MAGIC.dragChute().setVisible(false);

 

 

:music_whistling:

[OnlyforDCS]

Guys we have veered way of track in the discussion, the thread should be about the performance of the Magic II missile. (Or lack thereof ;) )

[OnlyforDCS]

Magic II vs Aim9m in DCS:

 

[grunf]

MAGIC.dragChute().setVisible(false);

 

 

:music_whistling:

LOL something similar came across my mind too.