Jump to content

[DCS BUG] AIM-54


chief
 Share

Recommended Posts

The fighter turned 10g towards the missile from the notch direction (that's the worst situation for intercept)

 

 

It's an in plane maneuver, which makes it an easy situation for intercept.

 

 

I don't say it's not capable of intercepting fighters, but intercepting 10g turns with 1km turn radius using 9.7km radius pull... Is actually very simple math, something is wrong, I don't know what

 

 

Your 'simple math' is what's wrong. It's not applicable to the problem at hand. Comparing turn radii is irrelevant.

[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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be right, I can simulate it on solid works when I have the time.

 

You're not, because exceeding your radial velocity only matters to the missile if it's shot from within your circle. It's attacking from outside your circle- which means *you* have to beat the missile's ability to generate angles.

 

It is the same principle that defines visual definitions of the fighter/bandit relationship in BFM. A missile shot within the circle against a turning bandit is seeing that target planform generate massive motion across it's canopy- or in this instance, the seeker FoV. If that rate exceeds what the missile can generate, it's a miss; if it doesn't, it's a hit.

 

Now reverse the perspective- missile outside of the bandit circle. The bandit now generates much less relative movement against the seeker. All you've done by turning back into the weapon is go from a point where you're generating the maximum possible motion across the FoV to next to nothing. You solved the weapon's geometric problem for it, and think it's a problem with the weapon, not your technique- that's where the error resides.

 

Your hypothetical is wrong because your perspective on the shot is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not, because exceeding your radial velocity only matters to the missile if it's shot from within your circle. It's attacking from outside your circle- which means *you* have to beat the missile's ability to generate angles.

 

It is the same principle that defines visual definitions of the fighter/bandit relationship in BFM. A missile shot within the circle against a turning bandit is seeing that target planform generate massive motion across it's canopy- or in this instance, the seeker FoV. If that rate exceeds what the missile can generate, it's a miss; if it doesn't, it's a hit.

 

Now reverse the perspective- missile outside of the bandit circle. The bandit now generates much less relative movement against the seeker. All you've done by turning back into the weapon is go from a point where you're generating the maximum possible motion across the FoV to next to nothing. You solved the weapon's geometric problem for it, and think it's a problem with the weapon, not your technique- that's where the error resides.

 

Your hypothetical is wrong because your perspective on the shot is wrong.

 

This! :thumbup:

Current modules:

FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map......ah yes, forgot the Super Carrier! Shows you how often i fly these days....

Modules in waiting: MiG-23, A-6, F-4U, F-8, Falklands Map

Wish list: South East Asia map, F-4J/N, F-15A/C, Su-27, Sea Harrier FRS.1, Mirage III, MiG-17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
Yup, but ED hasn't provided this sort of capability. If they had, you'd have heard about it.

 

#Blame ED... :bored:

This isn't a VEAO thread is it? Heatblur knew ED's reputation, it's still on them to deliver what they promised. I want to know when they intend to deliver.

Or at least see they are activly making progress on this? I don't think thats unreasonable do you?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#Blame ED... :bored:

This isn't a VEAO thread is it? Heatblur knew ED's reputation, it's still on them to deliver what they promised. I want to know when they intend to deliver.

Or at least see they are activly making progress on this? I don't think thats unreasonable do you?

 

 

Didn't ED said that they take control of all missiles development? At least that was my understanding from Deka's SD-10 thread. If that is the case ED has to deliver, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't ED said that they take control of all missiles development? At least that was my understanding from Deka's SD-10 thread. If that is the case ED has to deliver, no?

 

100% both are to blame but dude... If this was my product I'd be all over that shit. At the end of the day Heat are responsible for the F14 as a third party of DCS. They promised the F14 in all it's glory.. F14 ain't much of an F14 without an accurate Aim54

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will deliver when we get "that shit", Comie, lol. Until then you'll have to wait, like we have to wait. It is not in our hands to accelerate ED's development of the new missile API. Has nothing to do with blame, has everything to do with how development processes work. ED is working on their API and there is no point in giving us something that isnt finished yet, because it doesnt fully work for us yet. Trust me, we try it regularly and we work on the phoenix regularly. If we had a fix already, we'd have released it. What did you think, we just don't care and drag our asses, so you can make angry posts on the forums? Both ED and us are interested to get the phoenix right. But certain things take a certain time. ED started working on their new API at the end of last year, before that there was no other possibility to make it work, except for the compromise that is in place atm. Now we need to wait till they are done with what they are doing. And when they are, we'll fix it. In the meantime you get improved aim120s, and so on... Not everything evolves around us and the Tomcat alone. So, you'll have to be a pit patient here, please. :)


Edited by IronMike

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will deliver when we get "that shit", Comie, lol. Until then you'll have to wait, like we have to wait. It is not in our hands to accelerate ED's development of the new missile API. Has nothing to do with blame, has everything to do with how development processes work. ED is working on their API and there is no point in giving us something that isnt finished yet, because it doesnt fully work for us yet. Trust me, we try it regularly and we work on the phoenix regularly. If we had a fix already, we'd have released it. What did you think, we just don't care and drag our asses, so you can make angry posts on the forums? Both ED and us are interested to get the phoenix right. But certain things take a certain time. ED started working on their new API at the end of last year, before that there was no other possibility to make it work, except for the compromise that is in place atm. Now we need to wait till they are done with what they are doing. And when they are, we'll fix it. In the meantime you get improved aim120s, and so on... Not everything evolves around us and the Tomcat alone. So, you'll have to be a pit patient here, please. :)

 

You're right enought "blame" is the wrong word choice.

Good to hear, keep us upto date and keep pushing ED for that API. The people want their prized kitty :thumbup:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right enought "blame" is the wrong word choice.

Good to hear, keep us upto date and keep pushing ED for that API. The people want their prized kitty :thumbup:

 

 

 

 

Trust me, bud, it is a topic every single day with us. But sometimes you just cannot force time to pass faster than it does. We'll get there though. :)

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
For God's sake fix this, there are people who shoot at 50 miles.

 

 

We've been with this for a long time. This missile model in DCS is galactic.

Well... It should have more range than that Atazar, Now, due to API not updates, it losses about Mach 1 when changing from TWS to active mode, so I would say a good shot should be around 70NM in good conditions of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... It should have more range than that Atazar, Now, due to API not updates, it losses about Mach 1 when changing from TWS to active mode, so I would say a good shot should be around 70NM in good conditions of course.

 

 

They can fire 70 miles, but they won't hit a defensive aircraft at mach 1.2.

 

 

Launched 70 miles, it could take down a C-130

 

The perfect self-deception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can fire 70 miles, but they won't hit a defensive aircraft at mach 1.2.

 

 

Launched 70 miles, it could take down a C-130

 

The perfect self-deception.

The numbers say that the missile wwould arrive at more or less Mach 4. Perfect conditions for launching the Phoenix are M1.6 at 50k (You can see this easily youning a PvP server) and it can arrive and kill right now at 50NM a defensive target. Only to remember, right now it will lose Mach 1 when going active, so, without that Mach 1 loss it can easily kill and arrive a defensive aircraft at 60-70NM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The numbers say that the missile wwould arrive at more or less Mach 4. Perfect conditions for launching the Phoenix are M1.6 at 50k (You can see this easily youning a PvP server) and it can arrive and kill right now at 50NM a defensive target. Only to remember, right now it will lose Mach 1 when going active, so, without that Mach 1 loss it can easily kill and arrive a defensive aircraft at 60-70NM

 

 

Self-deception. This missile was not designed to hit a defensive F-18 at 50 miles at speeds of Mach 1.2. Do you want to fool yourself? You feel good? Congratulations.


Edited by La Unión | Atazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please stay kind to each other guys. We all want the same thing in the end and all sit in the same boat in the end. Please keep that in mind. :-)

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Self-deception. This missile was not designed to hit a defensive F-18 at 50 miles at speeds of Mach 1.2. Do you want to fool yourself? You feel good? Congratulations.

Do you want to share a track or a ACMI file?

Without that, your statement is sterile.

:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who come to my gym and gain 8 kilos of muscle mass in a month also do not recognize that they receive supplements.

 

 

I can't provide a blood test to prove it, so I assume my claim is sterile.

YOur example is not fair. In your example you gave us some specific data. 8 kg in one month.

 

 

 

Back to the Missile, we dont know the energies spent by the Hornet and by the Phoenix. We dont know launch parameters of the Phoenix. We dont know if you used chaffs. We dont know your initial flight parameters.

 

 

Flight combat is very complex for this reason "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.".

:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...