What is the controlled flight time for SD-10

[foxwxl]

Since DCS do involved a lot of modern stuff(a lot of people do like modern stuff, so do I), there is no prefect solution on missile modelling, since too many info is not accessable to the public.

 

I think which matters is that DCS can provide a reasonable modelling platform, like missile dynamic, seeker, guidance, etc. And not focusing on the value.

 

From LOMAC to FC1,FC2,FC3,DCSW2.5, the parameters and values have changed a lot, some time ER get better, some time 120 dominate the sky, thing aways going on like this.

 

If the basically modelling platform is good enough and the value setting is not so unacceptable, then things should be fine.

 

And one small tips on the final, If you have tested the seeker instant FOV(or seeker search speed) recently, you will find it is complete off at the moment, missile can capture target off boresight over 40 degrees at the moment seeker get activated(with totally no in-flight datalink support, radar turned off). And AIM120,AIM54 all get affected by this. I think this kind of problem is much more important than some value adjustment.

[Harlikwin]

IMO, it's basically impossible to make different missile performance to hookup for a proportional performance error VS the RL.

 

If one know how to hookup the performance in the DCS, he must have to know the real performance of the weapon, and we have classified weapon for all over the world. Even if ED would like to do this job, all development team have to donate and share their intel source into ED, which may not acceptable in lots of cases. So, I don't think it is possible.

 

If all missiles are created based on solo public source, the only thing might be accurate is the missile's shape, and you can try CFD the missile to get a general idea of its drag.

But another very important matter, the propellant volume and propellant type, is basically unknown(especially russian & chinese missile), thus the specific impulse is unknown. There is no "gernal idea" of the propellant type, different missile from different countries can be very different(even with different years, this can be different). Then, the only thing left is guessing and balancing, no more place for simulation. And this DO greatly matter to the range which players do care a lot.

Now new OP/UP problem is created, and players start to complain if their weapon is not on the top grade.

 

Actually the propellant types are more or less known from public sources, there is no magical secret chemistry and if there is it won't be for long, smokeless propellants will provide less ISP, while higher energy propellants will be smokey but provide more. Volume OTOH is harder, but again, if you know the missile mass, you can a decent idea because you can calculate the mass of the casing, the mass of the radar/electronics, which leaves the rest as propellant/engine. Perhaps not perfect but probably decently close. There are plenty of schematic "ish" images of most western and even Russian missiles, don't know about Chinese, but again its probably gonna be 'ish the same.

 

Will be it 100% accurate? Probably not, will it be close, probably, because physics....