530D's range

[myHelljumper]

Zeus states here that the real 530D has a range of 40km at and above 40,000ft. He also stated that EDs version performed well but it seems due to complaints RB made their own which now strangely has a 60km range. Not to mention a 45 sec battery time to negate the lack of drag this new missile has which should possibly be more like 60sec akin to older generation missile batteries.

 

Seems to me RB wanted to make this missile the fastest and most chaff resistant SARH missile in DCS regardless of figures to make it more competitive with FC3 aircraft.

This is not a bug but a feature.

 

I would like to see a 60km range shoot, for me the most that I can get is 18-19nm @ 40kft which is what Zeus said the missile was capable. And the battery life is 45 seconds.

[cauldron]

Since RAZBAM introduced their own missiles the 530D has disproportionately more range than its comparable competitiors. Are the original ED iterations even still in the game?

 

LMAO, this is a historic event. Someone asking for ED designed missiles instead of ones made by the 3rd party. You didn't see how horrendous those ED 530D's and 550's were, thank GOD they got those travesty of a flight model original missiles removed from the game.

 

This cracked me up a bit :megalol: "disproportionately more range than competitors"... I see where your coming from.

[*Rage*]

Razbam responded to the complaints of their customers who wanted better missiles.

Edited December 26, 2016 by ///Rage

[myHelljumper]

Razbam responded to the complaints of their customers who wanted more realistic missiles.

 

I have corrected it for you ;)

[*Rage*]

I have corrected it for you

 

To quote you from before - "source?"

Edited December 27, 2016 by ///Rage

[spiddx]

Fist it was the flight model, then it was the damage model, now it's suddenly the missiles... What's next? Canopy too transparent? :dunno:

[*Rage*]

Im a Razbam customer. What else should I ask for?

 

:)

[myHelljumper]

Here is for battery life time : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166420&highlight=super+530

 

And here for the missile performance : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158028&highlight=missile+performance

 

Please do a little forum search, the missile performances have been discussed a lot and they are realistic according to the data available.

 

Edit : Hey, in fact, the Super 530D might have a 60km range IRL :D : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2629813&postcount=326

Edited December 27, 2016 by myHelljumper

[TomCatMucDe]

Zeus states here that the real 530D has a range of 40km at and above 40,000ft. He also stated that EDs version performed well but it seems due to complaints RB made their own which now strangely has a 60km range. Not to mention a 45 sec battery time to negate the lack of drag this new missile has which should possibly be more like 60sec akin to older generation missile batteries.

 

Seems to me RB wanted to make this missile the fastest and most chaff resistant SARH missile in DCS regardless of figures to make it more competitive with FC3 aircraft.

This is not a bug but a feature.

 

where did you get that from? A question, do you fly the Mirage? have you ever get a 60km kill? I have never even got a 20 nm. It is easy to throw wrong facts on the faces of people but we are used that FC3 players always complain about their missiles. You can address this complaint to ED, they can make the planes even more arcade if it pleases you.

[myHelljumper]

where did you get that from? A question, do you fly the Mirage? have you ever get a 60km kill? I have never even got a 20 nm. It is easy to throw wrong facts on the faces of people but we are used that FC3 players always complain about their missiles. You can address this complaint to ED, they can make the planes even more arcade if it pleases you.

 

And that is true.

[*Rage*]

Here is for battery life time : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166420&highlight=super+530

 

And here for the missile performance : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158028&highlight=missile+performance

 

Please do a little forum search, the missile performances have been discussed a lot and they are realistic according to the data available.

 

Edit : Hey, in fact, the Super 530D might have a 60km range IRL :D : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2629813&postcount=326

 

 

Those are forum discussions. Not sources. There's a gazillion more missile performance threads if you search for them. Discussions not sources.

[Frostie]

where did you get that from? A question, do you fly the Mirage? have you ever get a 60km kill? I have never even got a 20 nm. It is easy to throw wrong facts on the faces of people but we are used that FC3 players always complain about their missiles. You can address this complaint to ED, they can make the planes even more arcade if it pleases you.

 

Missile achieves a kill from almost 60km only supposed battery life stops it exceeding this range as it still has plenty more energy travelling at 2.5 mach.

 

Maybe if you stopped playing airquake in the valleys you might learn something.

Tacview-20161227-010700-DCS.txt.rar

Edited December 27, 2016 by Frostie

[myHelljumper]

Those are forum discussions. Not sources. There's a gazillion more missile performance threads if you search for them. Discussions not sources.

 

Did you even click the links ? There are sources in those links and in those gazillion missile performance threads there are other sources.

 

 

Here : https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=132163&d=1451938104

 

This document says "the missile have an improved motor for a range of up to 60km/37.3 miles".

 

Here : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2624424&postcount=266

 

This extract says "its range is 50 km".

 

Here : http://pakdef.org/r530-and-super-530/

 

This source have the data "Range: 40 km".

 

 

Again I provided sources that the missile performances are correct but you didn't. Please, if the missile performances are not correct, fill a bug report with the data proving the bug.

 

If you can't prove your point with valid sources this is just trolling.

Edited December 27, 2016 by myHelljumper

[myHelljumper]

Missile achieves a kill from almost 60km only supposed battery life stops it exceeding this range as it still has plenty more energy travelling at 2.5 mach.

 

Ok the data :

 

M2000 : 45 kft - 1.37Mach

F-15C : 45 kft - 1.28Mach

 

Missile : ToF 45 sec, Max speed 4.25Mach, impact speed 2.43Mach

 

The 2 aircraft where flying strait head on with no maneuver from the targeted aircraft.

 

Range : 31.4 nm/58.2 km

 

Hey, that's a very long shot !

 

With the particular conditions, it does not seams too far off from the data that we have.

Edited December 27, 2016 by myHelljumper

[Frostie]

That is fair enough the range according to different sources can be anywhere up to 60km but for the 530D to reach 60km in DCS it still has 2.5 mach of speed, the figure pulled out of the air for self destruct is 45 seconds about the same as a manpad rather than a MRM, this stops it being an +80km missile in game. What i'm saying is that the missile is carrying too much energy in flight, the drag is not effective enough, if it was the missile with a more believable 60 second timer would travel to 40-60km just fine albeit not so fast.

[myHelljumper]

if it was the missile with a more believable 60 second timer would travel to 40-60km just fine albeit not so fast.

 

Do you have a source on that ?

 

Here : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2772907&postcount=9

 

Zeus says the missile life time is 45 seconds.

Edited December 27, 2016 by myHelljumper

[Frostie]

Do you have a source on that ?

 

Here : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2772907&postcount=9

 

Zeus says the missile life time is 45 seconds.

 

That is not a source, i'm just quoting others words from the internet too.

General belief was 60 seconds for AIM-7 etc. it just doesn'take sense to me for a missile to be performing so well at 60km why cut it short over the matter of not enough battery life, surely if the missile did perform this well they'd increase battery performance to gain the extra range.

Edited December 27, 2016 by Frostie

[cauldron]

That is fair enough the range according to different sources can be anywhere up to 60km but for the 530D to reach 60km in DCS it still has 2.5 mach of speed, the figure pulled out of the air for self destruct is 45 seconds about the same as a manpad rather than a MRM, this stops it being an +80km missile in game. What i'm saying is that the missile is carrying too much energy in flight, the drag is not effective enough, if it was the missile with a more believable 60 second timer would travel to 40-60km just fine albeit not so fast.

 

Just call your new MRM the 51-D missile, instead of the Matra-530D and all will be well. :megalol:

 

Let's see, from your own posted tacview i see no issues stand out right away. The missile flew 40km not 60km to its target launched from 1.4MACH vs a closing target also at approx same 1.3MACH and each at 46,000ft altitude. The atmosphere is very rarified at that altitude. Rockets love those high altitudes for range. The Acceleration & deceleration curves have been discussed in much detail ad-nauseum and have been soundly reviewed as being in the right place for the 530D. Considering that DLZ's vs Raero are hard to comeby, Feelings and patched together rationalizations put forth to claim the missile is incorrect will fall short.

 

For the most part there are seldom discussions about missile ranges vs targets over 40k feet. Why not launch at 50k feet vs. a closing target at 70k feet and your "range" will increase even more. The rational just isn't up to snuff, again the drag curves have been gone over already. You may want to try to look at the " contemporary " missiles you speak of and get their Kinematics reviewed, you may have better luck there. Watching the progress of this module Simulation is of concern, not "balance" with contemporary missiles. In my opinion if DCS hedges off to the path of "arcade" and "performance balancing" will make it turn into WarThunder, something I think this community would cringe at.

Edited December 27, 2016 by cauldron

[jojo]

Razbam responded to the complaints of their customers who wanted better missiles.

 

What is YOUR source to challenge in game missile's performance ?

Edited December 27, 2016 by jojo

[cauldron]

I think i may have seen that source... it's from "An encyclopedia of flight" by Troll Inc. Publishing.

[Coxy_99]

So if i complain hard enough Razbam will change it jus for me :lol:

[ZHeN]

did anyone manage to outmaneuver a 530D launched at you from TIR distance ? I mean drain energy from it with a spiral coil maneuver ?

[Coxy_99]

I have a youtube vid of me firing all my 350's in TIR and not one missed.

[spiddx]

did anyone manage to outmaneuver a 530D launched at you from TIR distance ? I mean drain energy from it with a spiral coil maneuver ?

 

Isn't that the point of shots within the NEZ? That the missile can't really be drained of energy within that region?

I avoid short range 530 shots a lot of times. Just not by draining them, but by notching and chaff to break lock.

 

And if you guys are really killed by 30+km shots while your RWR is screaming at you because of a Mirage hardlock for 40 seconds, the problem might be your flying skills rather than the missile performance. ;) It's a pain to keep the lock for even 10-15 secs against a maneuvering and notching target.

Edited December 27, 2016 by spiddx

[TomCatMucDe]

 

Maybe if you stopped playing airquake in the valleys you might learn something.

 

 

What? What are you talking about. We flew on Open Conflict and you saw me flying only high and not in the valleys. Your tacview will show you.

 

It's not the topic though but it only oeuvre how you just don't give a damn about facts sources, data. When you say "it just doesn't sound right to me" it becomes pointless to show you facts. A dedicated FC3 pilot complains about realism. How ironic...

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk