R-550Mk2 (Magic 2) & Super 530D Performances: Synthesis and sumary

[streakeagle]

The RCS of a MiG-21 is fairly small compared to the reference 5 m^2 typically used when quoting radar range performance, especially from a front quarter or head-on aspect. Not sure of how detailed DCS is in varying RCS values with aspect. I believe it is quoted as being less than 2 m^2.

 

What is the nominal range of the Mirage 2000C radar versus a 5 m^2 target at high altitude?

[jojo]

Old Flight Global article reported about 66Nm.

 

So MiG 21 RCS is unlikely to limit S530D firing range.

[CHRISXTR3M3]

A Tacview would help here. I think I made the seeker adjustments to be superior to what they used to be, but I may have goofed somewhere.

 

I'm really excited to see where your modifications take our M2k. :thumbup:

 

I believe I speak for many when I say, thank you for starting your work in the missile logic for our m2k. :D:D:joystick::pilotfly:

[GGTharos]

In RL figures from measurements for the miG-21 it is quoted at 10m^2. In any case, in the HAVE DOUGHNUT documents the longest head-on detection was 63-66nm, and that's only because they didn't start exercises from further away.

 

Look-down detection was 50nm from wheels up.

[Gunnergolly]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h1cevnkjqo2eroj/Tacview-20160124-153716-DCS.txt.acmi?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zlvxrbqr7jlnfqh/Tacview.txt.acmi?dl=0

 

I couldn't attach the above two files using the "Manage Attachments" button above due to it giving me "invalid file" errors.

 

I've never used Dropbox before to share files so i hope the above two links work ?.

[streakeagle]

According to wiki, 50-60 nm at high altitude vs 5 m^2.

If I remember correctly the range against a 2 m^2 target is: 50 * sqrt(2/5) = 31 nm

If the MiG-21bis is about 1.5 m^2: 50*sqrt(1.5/5) = 27 nm.

 

Of course, the RCS is even lower from the front, so 21 miles doesn't sound like an unrealistic number for detecting a MiG-21, though it might be on the low side as it requires an RCS less than 0.9 m^2.

[streakeagle]

I don't know how accurate this image is, but the numbers appear to be the nominal average RCS, not the head on values the images would suggest:

 

[streakeagle]

Assuming this chart is accurate, nominal RCS of 4 m^2 for the MiG-21 puts the range of the radar at 50 * sqrt(4/5) = 45 nm.

 

I would be curious to know how DCS models RCS?

I would expect FC3 aircraft to have a single nominal value, or maybe a very simple look-up table for various aspects (front/rear, top/bottom, sides). It would be nice if DCS level aircraft had something that was far more accurate providing a more detailed function that more closely reflects the dynamic variance of RCS with small changes in aspect.

[GGTharos]

I see in one it goes after the flares, in the other you're shooting in Rmin. Although the Rmin appears to be incorrect ... the missile's high boost might be causing it -some- trouble, but it's also not taking advantage of available AoA.

 

For the latter, I think this is an FM issue that I probably cannot resolve with tweaks.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h1cevnkjqo2eroj/Tacview-20160124-153716-DCS.txt.acmi?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zlvxrbqr7jlnfqh/Tacview.txt.acmi?dl=0

 

I couldn't attach the above two files using the "Manage Attachments" button above due to it giving me "invalid file" errors.

 

I've never used Dropbox before to share files so i hope the above two links work ?.

[GGTharos]

Again, real detection values have it at 60nm+, and RCS measurements at 10m^2, and that's with some pretty old technology.

 

In addition, RCS is not the only factor in detection range - radar self-noise and the ambient noise floor are huge factors. One of the biggest reasons for range increases is control of self-noise and reduction of ambient noise via sidelobe control and information processing.

 

Assuming this chart is accurate, nominal RCS of 4 m^2 for the MiG-21 puts the range of the radar at 50 * sqrt(4/5) = 45 nm.

 

I would be curious to know how DCS models RCS?

I would expect FC3 aircraft to have a single nominal value, or maybe a very simple look-up table for various aspects (front/rear, top/bottom, sides). It would be nice if DCS level aircraft had something that was far more accurate providing a more detailed function that more closely reflects the dynamic variance of RCS with small changes in aspect.

[Corsair]

I don't know how accurate this image is, but the numbers appear to be the nominal average RCS, not the head on values the images would suggest:

 

 

Rafale (Rafale D ????), 2 m² RCS.. nope !

[USAFMTL]

Yeah I think the RCS on the Raf-D is too big.

[Sweep]

B-2's RCS is 10 times too big, IMO.

 

Also, the pictures show some loaded aircraft and the RCS's are for clean ones :lol:

 

Also, sorry for the OT (kinda...not really).

[sedenion]

Yeah I think the RCS on the Raf-D is too big.

 

Maybe because it's a Rafale-D... there is no "Rafale-D" as far i know... only B, C and M...

[USAFMTL]

Maybe because it's a Rafale-D... there is no "Rafale-D" as far i know... only B, C and M...

Good point however, for any Rafael I think it's too big.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[Fer_Fer]

Rafale D did exists, but only on paper....

 

The French, in the 90's toyed with the idea of a stealth version of the Rafale, called the Dimutif, or Rafale D.

[sedenion]

Rafale D did exists, but only on paper....

 

The French, in the 90's toyed with the idea of a stealth version of the Rafale, called the Dimutif, or Rafale D.

 

The Rafale is already claimed as partialy stealth (for all versions)... maybe the "D" becomes the standard with the first C prototype... Anyway, don't know if the given RCS is correct or not for the Rafale, but i suspect that the RCS for B1-B, B2 and F-117 are a little too optimistic

[Fer_Fer]

The Rafale is already claimed as partialy stealth (for all versions)... maybe the "D" becomes the standard with the first C prototype... Anyway, don't know if the given RCS is correct or not for the Rafale, but i suspect that the RCS for B1-B, B2 and F-117 are a little too optimistic

 

My guess is that its off by quite a bit.

 

Dassault, allegedly, stated that the Rafale's RCS was 1/10th of that of the Mirage 2000. Assuming this is true, and the figure is correct, the Mirage 2000 has a RCS in the vicinity of a 4 engined strategic bomber.

[GGTharos]

If you want to halve the detection range, you need 1/16 the RCS. In other words, if you can detect a 1m^2 target at 20nm, you will detect a 16m^2 target at 40nm.

[USAFMTL]

Having been in AWACS, I can attest to the F-117 RCS being that small. Damn thing was almost impossible to find.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[Bidartarra]

Tharos,

 

I have copied your values for my 1.5 and did some test:

 

with the magic, I shot a cold target (Mig 29) from 5.6km away (launch alt 2000ft, launch speed was 1056km/h)

with the 530D, a hot Mig 29 was shot from 32km, missile hit at 19.4km (launch alt was 20.000ft, launch speed was 940km/h)

[GGTharos]

In theory you should be able to successfully shoot a target from 6nm trail at 20000' M0.9 and have performance remaining. But I assume your findings mean you are seeing better performance

[Bidartarra]

yes I think so, gonna try with the old lua in the same conditions

 

Edit:

 

Same test conditions, one magic shot from 4km hit (target at 2000ft) at 20000ft no 530D hit.

on the tests with the new lua shot the magic as son as i got a lock, so the range difference might be different than that.

 

Edit 2 :

Tried the magic at 20,000ft, target cold, shot from 6.5nm away at M0.88 and no hit. (used the modified lua)

Edited January 24, 2016 by Bidartarra

[jojo]

6.5Nm on cold target is too far for Fox 2. It's normal here.

[GGTharos]

Yeah, 3nm should be the absolute max you can expect for magic. For the 530D you could expect 6nm at 20000' in a tail chase.