DCS FIGHTER PILOT Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 As I’m sure all of you are aware, there is a major discrepancy between ED modeled missiles and your own. I for one a very happy with what you guys have done with the SD-10 and was hoping that it would inspire much needed changes in ED’s missiles. Though it has inspired change I’m not sure if it will be enough. I know I am just the middle man here but if you could provide some much needed data to back up your modeling it would go a long way. If you have already then my apologies for this message but if you have not, why? It would clear up so much controversy and would set the benchmark for ED to shoot for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L0op8ack Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 No, we cannot answer any question coming from CIA, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 They cannot say their sources, but understand that they are using the real coefficients. They got this data from somewhere, but you won’t find out where. The best thing that a user can do to collect data on it is run CFD on the 3D model. I don’t know what CFD program Deka used, but when Nighthawk did his CFD his results were pretty close to in game values Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oceandar Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 ............... I know I am just the middle man here but if you could provide some much needed data to back up your modeling it would go a long way. If you have already then my apologies for this message but if you have not, why? It would clear up so much controversy and would set the benchmark for ED to shoot for. Why not the other way around, instead of asking Deka to proof it to you that their modeling is right, you deliver them data (your research) to backup your oppinion about their missile. Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCS FIGHTER PILOT Posted February 18, 2020 Author Share Posted February 18, 2020 Here is the thing, I have little doubt that Deka modeled the SD-10 close to being correct. It is ED that I doubt. I was hoping that Deka could share with ED their data so that they would see how off they are. That does not look like it will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Here is the thing, I have little doubt that Deka modeled the SD-10 close to being correct. It is ED that I doubt. I was hoping that Deka could share with ED their data so that they would see how off they are. That does not look like it will happen. Sharing their info with ED is part of the 3rd party license and QA process I believe. Plus SD-10 is not perfect at all altitudes right now Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCS FIGHTER PILOT Posted February 18, 2020 Author Share Posted February 18, 2020 Hasn't Deka come out and said that ED are wrong? I seem to recall hearing this from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Yeah I’ll believe that when I see it. There’s a long thread from when the JF-17 came out, all the info you want is in there probably Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxwxl Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Source & data of actual WPN will not go on public at any circumstances, U know how this works.;) Deka Ironwork Tester Team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlikwin Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 They cannot say their sources, but understand that they are using the real coefficients. They got this data from somewhere, but you won’t find out where. The best thing that a user can do to collect data on it is run CFD on the 3D model. I don’t know what CFD program Deka used, but when Nighthawk did his CFD his results were pretty close to in game values Really what ED needs to do is redo all the missiles (starting with A/A) with some standardized process for the aerodynamic/thrust behavior. And the 3rd parties have to use that system, so that there is some standardization for the missiles. Maybe they're all off by 10% compared to real world numbers, but they are ALL off by 10% in the same direction, so that relatively speaking we still get something approaching relative performance. New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Really what ED needs to do is redo all the missiles (starting with A/A) with some standardized process for the aerodynamic/thrust behavior. And the 3rd parties have to use that system, so that there is some standardization for the missiles. Maybe they're all off by 10% compared to real world numbers, but they are ALL off by 10% in the same direction, so that relatively speaking we still get something approaching relative performance. You don’t remember when ED stated all missiles will be re done and they will publish a white paper explaining their performance? It was around late december Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-II Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 (edited) No, we cannot answer any question coming from CIA, obviously. :thumbup: Best reply in the thread. I thought it was known that Deka are working with official sources? I guess not. Instead of asking Deka how realistic their data is, how about asking ED to fix their missiles? Relative performance Even this would work as a temporary fix. Edited February 20, 2020 by Tiger-II Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlikwin Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 You don’t remember when ED stated all missiles will be re done and they will publish a white paper explaining their performance? It was around late december I do. I'm not holding my breath for it. The other thing they need to model are seeker performance and guidance logic. But at a guess that's gonna be a guessing game for anything more modern than 90's era missiles. New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-II Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 (edited) Even guessing somewhat accurately could be problematic, legally speaking, due to how US classification laws work. The guidance logic is, IMHO, more important than the raw missile physics. This becomes even more important when discussing SAMs, as they don't all just fly straight towards the target, and it consequently affects defence strategies and missile evasion. Edited February 20, 2020 by Tiger-II Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRISXTR3M3 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 As I’m sure all of you are aware, there is a major discrepancy between ED modeled missiles and your own. I for one a very happy with what you guys have done with the SD-10 and was hoping that it would inspire much needed changes in ED’s missiles. Though it has inspired change I’m not sure if it will be enough. I know I am just the middle man here but if you could provide some much needed data to back up your modeling it would go a long way. If you have already then my apologies for this message but if you have not, why? It would clear up so much controversy and would set the benchmark for ED to shoot for. The ONLY reason ED changed the flight model on the AIM-120 is because of all the people who were crying about the SD-10 actually challenging SPAMRAAMERS. It's hilariously and disgusting at the same time due to ED stating they realize their missile codes are off and were giving the code a revamp....BUT THEY ONLY REVAMPED THE AIM120. Why not revamp the R77, 27-ET, 27-ER, etc? Because since christmas 2019 was arriving ED was probably fearful that no one was is going to buy ED produced hornet and falcon modules during their winter sale unless they buffed the aim-120 User Files for AV8-B, X55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaHeen-1 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 grED. XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 The ONLY reason ED changed the flight model on the AIM-120 is because of all the people who were crying about the SD-10 actually challenging SPAMRAAMERS. It's hilariously and disgusting at the same time due to ED stating they realize their missile codes are off and were giving the code a revamp....BUT THEY ONLY REVAMPED THE AIM120. Why not revamp the R77, 27-ET, 27-ER, etc? Because since christmas 2019 was arriving ED was probably fearful that no one was is going to buy ED produced hornet and falcon modules during their winter sale unless they buffed the aim-120 They have said a few times they can only do one missile at a time, all the changes are made based off of CFD they run, which takes a lot of time, computing power, and money Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinky.ben Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) They have said a few times they can only do one missile at a time, all the changes are made based off of CFD they run, which takes a lot of time, computing power, and money Yeah but I bet they have now put all the other missiles very far down their list. We won’t see anything for the other missile for a long time. I’ll be surprised if we see any Russian missile get any upgrade this year. And they could fix the GOD like aim-120 that is completely resistant to any type of countermeasure and manoeuvre. That missile never and I mean NEVER stops track you even when you are in a perfect notch and dropping a ton of chaff in any situation that missile can never be tricked in anyway it is literally completely resistant to anything even physics. Plus the Aim-120 is getting a further improvement on it guidance system. How do you improve What is already completely perfect. Edited February 22, 2020 by Blinky.ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 I notch AIM-120 all the time. Slow down to make your notch bigger so you can be less precise, put your air brakes out, chaff as you turn into notch, and dive, make sure you are below the missile Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinky.ben Posted February 23, 2020 Share Posted February 23, 2020 I notch AIM-120 all the time. Slow down to make your notch bigger so you can be less precise, put your air brakes out, chaff as you turn into notch, and dive, make sure you are below the missile Interesting, I see your point about slowing down as to make less Doppler. I usually keep high speed to make large leads for the missile, as if cranking in case notching doesn’t work out. I will have to try this out. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 23, 2020 Share Posted February 23, 2020 High speed beaming is good for making the missile pull a lot of lead, however unfortunate current guidance in DCS means fox 3 always does pure pursuit when they are beyond Pitbull range, so it’s not as useful until they are within 7nm miles other then making them travel a bit further. I often slow down in a crank also while diving at radar gimbal limits, if you slow down head on(after they fire) the missile has to travel further, in addition to the pull needed to keep up wit your crank and the thicker air from your dive, sometimes that’s good enough to not even notch and chaff if they fire near max range. Obviously getting slow at the merge is bad, but you’re pretty invulnerable at slow speed diving in a notch until they are within heat seeker range It is always surprising how many people trust there DLZ:) Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinky.ben Posted February 23, 2020 Share Posted February 23, 2020 I’m sure this is something completely obvious but DLZ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted February 23, 2020 Share Posted February 23, 2020 Dynamic launch zone. You know when you lock and it show Rmax RTR/NEZ(Range turn and run/no escape zone), and Rmin Just take that recent “ AIM-120 range” thread were someone thought no escape zone meant it was literally inescapable Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiron Posted February 23, 2020 Share Posted February 23, 2020 Interesting, I see your point about slowing down as to make less Doppler. I usually keep high speed to make large leads for the missile, as if cranking in case notching doesn’t work out. I will have to try this out. Thanks hi speed is excellent not for notching just for energy battle if u want to defeat aim120c even without chaff but u have to understand who it work cuz sometimes i found myself with no chaff and no flare and that is a perfect moment for energy battle and keep in mind better use terrain mask not just mountain u can even use tree ( drive the missile to the ground and fly in tree level ) and if u want a 100% notch fly below the missile and near to ground so u can be in ( green zone ) to confuse missile guidance there is a video in Growling sidewinder channel explaining this but against sam this video will be helpful for u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-II Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 I drag them to the deck and defeat them kinematically. Flying behind tall objects works pretty well, too. Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts