sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 I'm confused... If the Magic II is only marginal improvements of the Magic I, and the Magic I actually sucked, wouldn't the Magic II kind of suck? Aerodynamically there is no major changes between 1 and 2, but the 2 have a greatly improved seeker and proximity fuze... and then a 10% more propellant. The Magic1 sucks mainly because of its seeker and proximity fuse, which were not very efficient. The Magic2 is at AIM-9M level... Maybe ED has it right and we are all wrong... :megalol: I sure hope not! ED modelised a kind of Magic1 with a drogue chute...
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 The Magic 2 seeker's range... at least 6.5nm (11km) so... current in-game is less performant ? However, this can be interesting: http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=132212&stc=1&d=1452000641
OnlyforDCS Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2630685&postcount=31 This is a great post. What it doesn't show however is whether the seeker has acquired the lock because it is slaved to the radar (the mode is also not close combat as far as I can see) or whether it has automatically acquired the target in its FOV limits. It does however show a DLZ that I have yet to see with the Magic II in the game! I hope this can be shown to ED. Nice find! Edited January 5, 2016 by OnlyforDCS Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.
TomCatMucDe Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 This is a great post. What it doesn't show however is whether the seeker has acquired the lock because it is slaved to the radar (the mode is also not close combat as far as I can see) or whether it has automatically acquired the target in its FOV limits. It does however show a DLZ that I have yet to see with the Magic II in the game! I hope this can be shown to ED. Nice find! if the range is shown, then it must be a radar lock. the heat seeker itself cant determin the distance without the radar.
OnlyforDCS Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 if the range is shown, then it must be a radar lock. the heat seeker itself cant determin the distance without the radar. Im not sure you understood my point. Of course it's a radar lock, Im not disputing that. What Im wondering about is whether the seeker was 'slaved' to the radar by the pilot, or whether it acquired the target on its own. In any case it's not even that important, this is the first solid real life picture we have had showcasing the DLZ of the Magic II missile, look at that range man! 23k feet, head on target, that seems to line up perfectly with what the missile should be doing according to available data. Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.
TomCatMucDe Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Im not sure you understood my point. Of course it's a radar lock, Im not disputing that. What Im wondering about is whether the seeker was 'slaved' to the radar by the pilot, or whether it acquired the target on its own. In any case it's not even that important, this is the first solid real life picture we have had showcasing the DLZ of the Magic II missile, look at that range man! 23k feet, head on target, that seems to line up perfectly with what the missile should be doing according to available data. didn't react or acknowledge the weaknesses of both Mirage missiles. I hope they will give an update after russian xmas.
emg Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) The Magic I and the Magic II are very similar aerodynamically... I'm confused... If the Magic II is only marginal improvements of the Magic I, and the Magic I actually sucked, wouldn't the Magic II kind of suck? Maybe ED has it right and we are all wrong... :megalol: I sure hope not! Talking about aerodynamics only, the Magics are very similar to the Israeli Python 4. When two separate def industries ended up making a similar missile, IMO we can assume their aerodynamics don't suck. Edited January 5, 2016 by emg
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 hop http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2630936&postcount=38
IASGATG Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 hop http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2630936&postcount=38 I'd say that 8/8.5nmi is a bit generous. 7.5 is more like it. Moreover does this crazy French HUD show any of the targets information? Aspect/Speed/Alt?
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 I'd say that 8/8.5nmi is a bit generous. 7.5 is more like it. Moreover does this crazy French HUD show any of the targets information? Aspect/Speed/Alt? ~8 nm is the Magic2 max range (15 km) the "Raero"... at ~4nm we have the Rpi or Ropt, at ~1nm the Rmin. Infos (alt, speed etc) are here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2630685&postcount=31 That say: The Mirage is at ~23000ft, mach 0.84, and closing speed to the target is ~550kt...
GGTharos Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Closing speed is 800-840kts, target altitude 19000'. Target speed and aspect are unknown, but yes 'our' plane is at around 550KTAS. [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 January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Closing speed is 800-840kts, target altitude 19000'. where do you see that ? the ~[550] above the scale is the closing speed to the target as far as i know...
jojo Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Closing speed is 800-840kts, target altitude 19000'. Target speed and aspect are unknown, but yes 'our' plane is at around 550KTAS. Aspect is 140°, written below the circle... Mirage fanatic ! I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2. Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
jojo Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 where do you see that ? the ~[550] above the scale is the closing speed to the target as far as i know... Yes, but it's IAS, you have to take account of altitude... Mirage fanatic ! I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2. Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Yes, but it's IAS, you have to take account of altitude... You sure ? The closing speed is computed by the doppler radar, it convert speed to IAS ?...
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Not certain the closing velocity is given as CAS. I assume a delta GS indication would be more relevant
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Sound strange to me, since the closing velocity is given directly by the radar, recomputing the closing speed to give an IAS (from what parameter ? the current altitude ? target altitude ? air pressure between the aircraft and the target ?) is a kind of non-sense to me... I wait for confirmation...
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) For instance, the value given by the F-16 SNA are hybrid : target speed is CAS to evaluate its kinematic capabilities (by how much can the target maneuver ? What is target's performance reserve ?) and closing velocity is given in delta GS (probably for time estimation until merge, join up). It should be the same on the 2000. Edited January 5, 2016 by Corsair
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Sound strange to me, since the closing velocity is given directly by the radar, recomputing the closing speed to give an IAS (from what parameter ? the current altitude ? target altitude ? air pressure between the aircraft and the target ?) is a kind of non-sense to me... I wait for confirmation... It would not be a precise calculation, the algorithms used certainly take the standard atmosphere as reference.
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 It would not be a precise calculation, the algorithms used certainly take the standard atmosphere as reference. But, what is the "standard atmosphere" between "you" and "the target" if, for example, you are at 33000ft and the target at 5000ft ? There is just no reasons to give an IAS as closing speed since: - The radar gives directly a precise true speed (not an AIRspeed, a speed, the radar is made for that) - An closing "airspeed" in "IAS" is not a very usefull information for the pilot, and even strange. - Computing an IAS through a line of a variable air density layer appear just too complicated (is that only makes sense ? not to me) for no real pertinent info The IAS is the IAS because the instrument take the air pressure, and the air pressure change with altitude... but there is no reason to transform an "true speed" to an hypothetical strange "indicated air speed depending the air pressure" for closing speed to the target...
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 The calculated CAS of target takes into account its altitude ofc.
jojo Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Your HUD speed is IAS, so yes it makes sense to display closing speed in CAS in HUD. Mirage fanatic ! I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2. Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
sedenion Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 The calculated CAS of target takes into account its altitude ofc. I don't understand what you mean... by CAS do you mean Calibrated Airspeed, yes ?... The "closing speed" is the first "raw data" computed by the doppler, without need of atmospheric parameter or things like that... If you want the "target's speed" (not the CLOSING speed), you can need to do some computing, yes... but only if you want something like the "target's speed"... but not for the "closing speed".
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Well I think a target speed indication in indicated airspeed makes sense (and i think ir is the case I said) but I am perplexe about a IAS closing velocity. What will be the reference altitude used in the calculation if the aircraft and target altitudes are different (by a lot) ? Is it safe ? If two aircraft at high altitude and high speed are closing fast, a CAS velocity indication will be very misleading. Edited January 5, 2016 by Corsair
Corsair Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 I don't understand what you mean... by CAS do you mean Calibrated Airspeed, yes ?... The "closing speed" is the first "raw data" computed by the doppler, without need of atmospheric parameter or things like that... If you want the "target's speed" (not the CLOSING speed), you can need to do some computing, yes... but only if you want something like the "target's speed"... but not for the "closing speed". That's my point : - target speed is indicated airspeed - closing velocity is true speed ..should be clearer that way, in case I mixed stuff up in my previous posts
Recommended Posts