[DCS BUG] Rmax missile indicator is useless

[uri_ba]

I've flown an MP session with a friend yesterday, we had done several engagements against none manuvering targets.

 

I'm no expert, but AFAIK Rmax (Soviet R1) indicate maximum range against a none manuvering target. Ie. If I shoot at Rmax, and target does nothing, missile will hit.

 

We have fired 7M at such a target on Rmax indicator, launch was about 30nm (P-STT) , HO with about 1000kts closure. The missile ran out of steam at about 15nm. It left the rail, accelerated to M2.0 (we were 0.9) and just crapped out.

Edited April 14, 2019 by IronMike

[MysteriousHonza]

This system in tomcat is very simple and iam pretty sure that it wont change with altitude and probably even speed, iam not even using it, just learn how missiles performs, hot nonmaneuvering target can be hit by 20-25nm shot from higher altitude like 25-30 angels, low altitude at hot target about 10-15 nm with help of all possible gods, more likely 10-12, always try to go higher if you know that enemy wont be maneuvering, it will help the missile significantly. You can even make kill at 80nm with AIM54's on mp when launching in high alt, even when F-14 shouldnt be able to engage fighter sized targets on these ranges.

[IceFire]

It's not even the Tomcat, unfortunately, it's every US missile, not sure about Russian ones. But they all are pretty much wrong, pull too hard, lose all their energy even at RMAX against a closing target. etc etc. Eagle Dynamics controls the weapons in the sim. Until they deem them worthy to fix we're stuck.

 

Secondly, Honza... F-14 was tested to kill *cruise missile* sized targets at 100+ miles. So it absolutely should be able to engage a "fighter sized target" at that distance.. Whether the missile hits or not I don't know or care but the current implementation of the Phoenix Missile is wrong and unfortunately, that's not HB's fault. ED must look into it.

[MysteriousHonza]

100 miles shots were never tested against cruise missiles and radar IRL in TWS was able to provide track on bomber sized targets at these ranges, +- 70 miles for fighter sized targets.

[IceFire]

Got any sources on that there? Because I have some...

 

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=700&ct=2

 

For the TLDR Crowd..

 

This was shot down at 110NM with an AIM-54A.

 

 

So I say again.. The missiles are wrong and need to be fixed.

HB Can't fix them, ED must.

Edited April 12, 2019 by IceFire

[Strikeeagle345]

Got any sources on that there? Because I have some...

 

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=700&ct=2

 

For the TLDR Crowd..

 

This was shot down at 110NM with an AIM-54A.

 

 

Edited April 12, 2019 by Strikeeagle345

[IceFire]

Now I will say that 100NM shots should really only be done against non-maneuvering targets but currently, right now you can't hit a non-maneuvering target at 60 routinely. I'm talking bombers and transports.

 

I already know why as well. The missile starts its terminal dive too late in the profile, therefore, causing the missile to turn 90° to its relative motion to track the target... Problem is when it does that it turns into a giant airbrake completely removing the advantage given by lofting up to store that potential energy to begin with... Terminal dive should be earlier so the missile does not do that and we'll have a proper Phoenix missile.

[Ignition]

When the AIM-54 goes active it loses 1/3 of its speed since it turns like a gbu-12 trying to follow the laser.

The missile lose the speed advantage.

[uri_ba]

It's not even the Tomcat, unfortunately, it's every US missile, not sure about Russian ones. But they all are pretty much wrong, pull too hard, lose all their energy even at RMAX against a closing target. etc etc. Eagle Dynamics controls the weapons in the sim. Until they deem them worthy to fix we're stuck.

 

I'm looking at it from a different perspective then you, I don't care that the missile is not modeled correctly and ED should fix it.

 

I want my Range markers to show me than current missile kinematic envalope. Let it be Rmax for 5nm for all I care. But the fact that the aircraft is "lying" to you is a problem. It shows you what the envalope Should be rather then what it is.

 

I want to know how useless the missile is, not guesstimate how bad it will function compared to what the AC shows me.

[lunaticfringe]

Fundamental problem with that is the WEZ isn't ultimately calculated by the missile as in RL, where the individual variant dynamics are carried in the software. Instead, a module developer would be required to compensate for every change that ED would make at this point now, or in the future, rather than present the information as both understood, and from where ED should ultimately be taking it.

 

The presented WEZs for every aircraft in DCS are effectively borked. ED corrects the guidance and drag profiles for the environment, and they'll work.

For now, it's either live in, or rework the calculations every time they alter something.

 

It is what it is.

[uri_ba]

I'm not finiliar with the inner workings of DCS but in the "other military sim" each missile FM contains a baked range table, for altitude vs Mach pre calculated for a stationary target by the creator of the missile FM.

 

The OMS code then needs just to read this table, calculate closure rate into these numbers and presto, consistent DLZ accross all modules. If ED works like this, once a missile is updated, all the modules automatically have the correct DLZ data to display.