Aim-120C VS SD-10 2.5.6

[DCS FIGHTER PILOT]

Tracks and Tac View Show everything no need for detailed explanation on the differences, which is still night and day. And before anyone criticizes for making comparisons, if the two missiles are in the same sim, then comparisons must absolutely be made. Its rather silly to say otherwise.

 

Now I get that the Sd-10 would probably enjoy a higher top speed than the AMRAAM since it burns longer but wouldn't it suffer from more drag? I would certainly think so seeing as how it has those rather large guiding fins when compared to the 120c. Now if I recall, nighthawks CFD said that Deka's SD-10 modeling was pretty much spot on when it came to the aerodynamic coefficients and that the ED AMRAAM is still a bit draggy. Is this correct nighthawk? Again I am asking this because it seems like no one knows if the current Aim-120 is the finished product or if more work on the drag model will be done. Based on these tracks I would certainly hope a bit more work is planned.

 

Also in the future, would it be possible to include Aim-120's with different motors? This would greatly add to the dynamics of BVR.

 

 

 

https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/my-drive

SD-10 VS Aim-120C 1.trk

SD-10 VS Aim-120C 2.trk

AIm-120C Ideal Shot.trk

Sd-10 Ideal Shot.trk

Edited May 1, 2020 by DCS FIGHTER PILOT

[panton41]

I haven't checked the tracks, but there's a reason the US is working on the AIM-260 JATM. Despite significant upgrades over the years, the AMRAAM is getting a bit dated and especially in the range department.

[AeriaGloria]

Don’t forget SD-10 is based on Sparrow, and thus optimized for higher altitude

 

It has 20kg more fuel, and when fuel burns out it is only 10kg heavier then AMRAAM, becuase to begin with its already 50kg lighter then American Sparrow variants

[nighthawk2174]

Now I get that the Sd-10 would probably enjoy a higher top speed than the AMRAAM since it burns longer but wouldn't it suffer from more drag?

 

Not necessarily the sparrow for example has a very long burn time but has a much lower top speed its really dependent on all the variables thrust/weight/drag. Plus the final sustain stage is really only supposed to fire when the target is in terminal and about to hit the target. Deka can't do this currently though in DCS due to how limited the code is in this regard.

 

I would certainly think so seeing as how it has those rather large guiding fins when compared to the 120c.

 

Yes its quite likely that the missile experiences more drag but not just due to the larger fins, the amount of drag that could be added just due to a different nose shape and the larger size of the body probably outweighs this.

 

Now if I recall, nighthawks CFD said that Deka's SD-10 modeling was pretty much spot on when it came to the aerodynamic coefficients

yup

 

and that the ED AMRAAM is still a bit draggy.

yes a bit more than a bit though. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kKgmzpUWwtN4Zxws6UajlUwy-oQCP9SG

 

Again I am asking this because it seems like no one knows if the current Aim-120 is the finished product or if more work on the drag model will be done.

It's definitely isn't, they've shown off some cfd work their doing but it isn't in the game yet. In terms of performance there is essentially no difference between old and current performance: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4225128&postcount=93

 

Based on these tracks I would certainly hope a bit more work is planned.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4251084&postcount=245

Also in the future, would it be possible to include Aim-120's with different motors? This would greatly add to the dynamics of BVR.

well the two motors used on the A/B and the C-C5 we have decent numbers for and finding anything on the C7 isn't going to be possible.

[Shadow KT]

How come SAM's have two stage motors, but an A2A missile can't have one ?

Edited May 1, 2020 by Shadow KT

[nighthawk2174]

Not sure that's just what deka said that they couldn't program it right. That all it had was an option for boost/sustain.

[Harker]

How come SAM's have two stage motors, but an A2A missile can't have one ?

The problem is not the dual stage, the problem is the dual pulse. Dual stage exists now and it's what you're referring to with some SAMs, as in boost+sustain stages. Dual pulse is when the second stage is fired when the missile enters its terminal stage.

Deka said that the SD-10A missile we have doesn't have dual pulse, only later variants did.

[DCS FIGHTER PILOT]

Would you say you are optimistic about their CFD work Nighthawk?

It looks like they have indeed put a great deal of work into it so I would say that I am optimistic .

[nighthawk2174]

Now if their work on the HARM is representative of what their doing in the background then yes so long as they don't f* up it should be good.

[Kumabit]

Hell yeah I can see people just want their AIM120C to be a god weapon and any weapon that surplus the old AIM120C is UNREALISTIC

[Wizard_03]

Unfortunately in the squeaky clean EM environment we have in DCS comparing missile Dynamics is like comparing unicorns to leprechauns since ECM is arugably a bigger factor then aerodynamics in this day and age. How the missile "flies" is somewhat accidemic if it can't attack it's target properly.

 

Also Guidence logic is incredibly important and is not equal across the board like it is in DCS.

 

I think the SD-10 and other modern missiles might have better motors and kinematics then the the AMRAAM for sure but IRL that doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in DCS since we fly in a vacuum when it comes to ECM. The real life story like always is a lot more complex.