SD-10 downgrade

[Exile5121]

I would however very much like to thank Deka for being transparent.

this is out of your guys's wheelhouse so we should be posting to ED

 

I would like to bring this post to people's attention. as what they said means that this is the appropriate form to address it in https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=274354

[Chiron]

i already did and i hope everyone stay active there pls cuz we can't let that happened its not right and if we didn't talk we can expect more nerfing to everything cuz from what i see they want to nerf for some self interest protection for their modules hope i am wrong about that sorry

[nighthawk2174]

I do want to note the drag almost perfectly matches my CFD results what's odd is the drop in both thrust and missile life time.

[L0op8ack]

I'm not bashing Deka for what's happening. You have produced an incredible piece of work.

 

I can only guess that instead of ED fixing their side and increasing missile ranges, they've made the SD-10 to be shorter range.

 

Unless I've confused kilometers and miles (possible) I thought the SD-10 was supposed to be capable of around 50 NM when launched from high altitude and speed?

 

I did some more research prior to writing this post. Here's what I found:

 

SD-10/PL-12 = 21 km max range

LD-10 = 60 km max range

 

SD-10A/PL-12A (the version I thought we had): 105 km max range ("comparable to AIM-120C4").

 

21 km = 11.3 NM

60 km = 32.3 NM

105 km = 56.7 NM

 

Convention states that "max range" assumes a high altitude, high speed launch (with the launch platform typically at Mach 1.0), lofting the missile at optimum offset against a non-maneuvering target.

 

Assuming we have the SD-10A, these shots were well inside the missile max range.

 

If ED are deliberately downgrading all missiles - why? Are they being forced to do so by an outside agency?? No other explanation makes sense.

 

You can't change the laws of physics, and not all of us out here can be fooled by something that's obviously wrong.

 

Shortening missile ranges is equivalent to doubling the effect of gravity on dumb bombs - absolute nonsense.

 

 

There are some public stories from J-10 test pilot, about weapon/radar testing:

achieve lock @70~80 km

launch weapon(older than PL-12) @~50km, and got a kill:)

 

 

MRM missile with 21 km max range, will never pass any test.

 

 

 

https://weibo.com/6568497405/J1T2bhM5d

Edited May 23, 2020 by L0op8ack

[Chizh]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4346803&postcount=15

[Shrike88]

So ED long term weapons goals are shooting for is Fair play across the board ?

[AeriaGloria]

Tiger, the one we have is not the SD-10A I believe, just SD-10. For Chinese weapons A seems to stand for improved variants, that’s why we have C-802 and C-802A, the A is newer, and AK even newer then that.

 

It is 70km stated publicly, and I have no idea how you got 25km, I get 20-38nm kills all the time

[Chiron]

i think there is also SD-10B

[Tiger-II]

Tiger, the one we have is not the SD-10A I believe, just SD-10. For Chinese weapons A seems to stand for improved variants, that’s why we have C-802 and C-802A, the A is newer, and AK even newer then that.

I thought we had the A model.

 

 

It is 70km stated publicly, and I have no idea how you got 25km, I get 20-38nm kills all the time

Several sources stated for SD-10/PL-10 25 km. The same sources stated LD-10 was 60 km, and they also quote SD-10A/PL-10A at 105 km.

 

 

I, too, was a bit surprised at the particularly short range of the SD-10, but given they had the more widely reported range of the LD-10 at 60 km, I didn't see it as being a mere typo.

 

 

Maybe it is 25 km under the worst conditions (active off the rail at low altitude?).

[Tiger-II]

i think there is also SD-10B

 

 

I want the SD-10D. That thing has a jet engine and a range of 150 km. AFAIK it was only a proposal.

Edited May 23, 2020 by Tiger-II

[AeriaGloria]

I thought we had the A model.

 

 

 

Several sources stated for SD-10/PL-10 25 km. The same sources stated LD-10 was 60 km, and they also quote SD-10A/PL-10A at 105 km.

 

 

I, too, was a bit surprised at the particularly short range of the SD-10, but given they had the more widely reported range of the LD-10 at 60 km, I didn't see it as being a mere typo.

 

 

Maybe it is 25 km under the worst conditions (active off the rail at low altitude?).

 

Yeah I would like to see that source becuase I always see 70km, never less. If they meant NEZ that would be the first source I’ve seen that mentions it. If you can find anything that says we have A model, I would love to see that also. I would be interested to know what it stands for along with AK and AKG

[Tiger-II]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4346803&postcount=15

 

 

Thank you. :thumbup:

[Tiger-II]

Yeah I would like to see that source becuase I always see 70km, never less. If they meant NEZ that would be the first source I’ve seen that mentions it. If you can find anything that says we have A model, I would love to see that also. I would be interested to know what it stands for along with AK and AKG

 

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-i.html?m=1

 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=g3yNDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT242&lpg=PT242&dq=sd-10+max+range&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q=sd-10%20max%20range&f=false

[AeriaGloria]

The first one mentions SD-10A on JF-17 but I am not sure how accurate that is, the paragraph itself doesn’t make too many distinctions, and who knows the source, it seems it’s a collection of data from forums.

 

For the second, it’s not stated where the 21km comes from, but magazines such as Air Force monthly and Jane’s are cited as places were the information may have come from. Whatever the source it must be either inaccurate or a misinterpretation of numbers given, as that is an extremely short range. For example it gives 50km for LD-10 and 60 for DK-10, both seem more realistic but couldn’t possibly outrange the air to air variant using the 30,000 foot co altitude baseline test used for the 70km stated range.

 

It’s stated range is 70km, as for it being A model or not, I guess that is up in the air more, but I would bet firmly on it being just SD-10 and not SD-10A

[Chiron]

i dont know Aeria i am so confused about what happening so far and i am not optimistic with anything anymore i like what Deka did and i will still support them nothing more and about SD-10 talking i am not sure i can continue anymore due to so many people hate SD-10 cuz its a Chinese weapon . and after ED took control of all missiles i dont think that they concern of supporting SD-10

Edited May 23, 2020 by Chiron

[AeriaGloria]

It’s ok, it is a really polarizing topic, with missiles you are always going to have people jumping in with hidden motives or not so subtle intentions.

 

However it’s one of my favorite topics to discuss it’s possible performance, the SD-10/PL-12 is the pinnacle of the AIM-7 family, an example of where it could go if development for it and its European variants hadn’t stopped.

[Harlikwin]

Oh boy, I guess im in on the purse swinging contest.

 

About the data, at the end of the day there are actual open source military intel providers that do this for a living, have credible numbers that you can buy. Janes probably being the most famous of them, but there are plenty of others. And while it may be cost prohibitive for us mere mortals to buy the info, I'm pretty sure ED probably has a subscription. And one would hope the 3rd party devs might be able to spring for one too. And no, its probably against policy to post that stuff out in the open. Frankly I find the folks posting here about Wikipedia laughable as its a laughable source and very far from the only open source one.

 

As for ED taking over 3rd party weapon modeling. This makes a ton of sense to me. With things like CFD you basically need a repeatable model way of doing it for everything you have so at least the results are relatively comparable. So I have 0 problem with ED being the ones doing that, its not about nationalism or any other stupid thing, its about using the same methodology every time to get consistent results. And frankly If they do the SD10, I hope they end up doing the Phoenix and The 530/magic etc. So that at least from a drag curve perspective its all on the same page. I'd also like it if they might share that data with the community since its not "real".

 

<flame suit on>

[hamza_Khan]

I hope they end up doing the Phoenix and The 530/magic etc.

 

I personally think this is the main reason why most of the community is not happy ED taking over.

It took SD-10 for ED to review AMRAAM, Now that ED is controlling all missiles, I think we can expect improvements on phoenix, magic, Russian Missile family in no more than 2 weeks.

Edited May 23, 2020 by hamza_Khan

[Harlikwin]

I personally think this is the main reason why most of the community is not happy ED taking over.

It took SD-10 for ED to review AMRAAM, Now that ED is controlling all missiles, I think we can expect improvements on phoenix, magic, Russian Missile family in no more than 2 weeks.

 

Well thats a whole other topic. But yeah nothing ED does is fast. But you cant have magic missiles in dcs either.

Edited May 23, 2020 by Harlikwin

[paco2002]

Well thats a whole other topic. But yeah nothing ED does is fast. But you cant have magic missiles in dcs either.

Then, you don't want to see the Meteor on DCS...

[Tiger-II]

The first one mentions SD-10A on JF-17 but I am not sure how accurate that is, the paragraph itself doesn’t make too many distinctions, and who knows the source, it seems it’s a collection of data from forums.

 

For the second, it’s not stated where the 21km comes from, but magazines such as Air Force monthly and Jane’s are cited as places were the information may have come from. Whatever the source it must be either inaccurate or a misinterpretation of numbers given, as that is an extremely short range. For example it gives 50km for LD-10 and 60 for DK-10, both seem more realistic but couldn’t possibly outrange the air to air variant using the 30,000 foot co altitude baseline test used for the 70km stated range.

 

It’s stated range is 70km, as for it being A model or not, I guess that is up in the air more, but I would bet firmly on it being just SD-10 and not SD-10A

 

 

I'm not saying it is right or wrong as source; I'm just posting because you asked.

 

 

Deka say they have good sources for data, and I have no reason to doubt them. Based on what they've posted in the past, I have even less reason to doubt them.

 

 

Fact: we do not have access to real missile data.

 

 

Fact: we can infer performance, the same way ED does: CFD. I know there are people out there who know how to do this, and can do the modelling independently.

 

 

I wasn't intending to cause trouble with my post, because I do think there is something like a bug here, beyond the obvious.

 

 

I flew the F-18 today with a friend in MP. We fired AIM-120B, C, AIM-7M and AIM-9X and we saw some weird things.

 

 

I had one missile track right over the target at 80000 ft. :doh: I was flying the F-18, and fired an AIM-120B. Something is very, very wrong with missiles and tracking.

 

 

When it comes to missiles generally in DCS, I'm only interested in two things: that they are modelled as accurately as declassified/public information allows, and that they actually conform to the laws of physics.

 

 

The Phoenix has 150 NM range? I don't care. The Tomcat has a RADAR to match? I don't care. I'm out-gunned, out-ranged, and out-classed? I don't care.

 

 

I only care that it is ACCURATE. If a missile is supposed to have 50 NM range, I expect to be able to achieve it. Not some gamified version because a bunch of people want to fly unrealistically.

 

 

Want "balance"? Fly the same aircraft types against each other. Perfection.

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Tiger-II

[Tiger-II]

The first one mentions SD-10A on JF-17 but I am not sure how accurate that is, the paragraph itself doesn’t make too many distinctions, and who knows the source, it seems it’s a collection of data from forums.

 

For the second, it’s not stated where the 21km comes from, but magazines such as Air Force monthly and Jane’s are cited as places were the information may have come from. Whatever the source it must be either inaccurate or a misinterpretation of numbers given, as that is an extremely short range. For example it gives 50km for LD-10 and 60 for DK-10, both seem more realistic but couldn’t possibly outrange the air to air variant using the 30,000 foot co altitude baseline test used for the 70km stated range.

 

It’s stated range is 70km, as for it being A model or not, I guess that is up in the air more, but I would bet firmly on it being just SD-10 and not SD-10A

 

Actual photos follow: https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-AAM.html#mozTocId835567

 

SD-10A.

 

 

Interestingly, the visual model of the DCS SD-10 shows SD-10A as the model identification/serial number. The tooltip text/other parts of the sim just say "SD-10", but it would appear that the real aircraft actually has SD-10A missiles.

 

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2019/04/10/what-does-pakistan-need-to-close-its-air-defense-gaps/

 

April 10, 2019

 

Claims that Pakistan tested the latest Chinese PL-15 beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) appear inaccurate, and Tufail thinks the combination of the F-16 armed with the AIM-120 missile and the SD-10A-equipped JF-17 remains effective in light of current threats.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-PL-10-missile-How-good-is-it-compared-to-the-R-73-How-bad-will-it-be-once-the-JF-17-has-it-along-with-HMDS

 

PL-12/SD-10, claimed to use the seeker and other components from the Russian R-77 AMRAAM-ski.

 

R-77 has speed of 4 mach and can operate at altitudes as 25000 m high, a firing range of 110 km, its multi-purpose target engagement capabilities and resistance against countermeasures are among the best in the world.

 

Credited with competitive performance against the AMRAAM, the PL-12 has a range of approximately 100 kilometers.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3GZaDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=sd-10+missile+range&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q=sd-10%20missile%20range&f=false

 

Scroll for picture. Missile states SD-10A.

 

http://defenseupdates.blogspot.com/2012/11/sd-10a-and-ld-10-missiles-at-zhuhai.html

 

I think I found the source for the 21 km figure...ALTITUDE

 

Range: 100 km

Altitude: 21 km

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-i.html

 

Read the following very carefully.

 

PL-12 completed its development test in December 2004 and was certified in 2005.

Its export version is called SD-10

 

(SD-10A as the improved version)

and was first revealed to the public during the 2002 Zhuhai Airshow. Currently it is in the service with J-8F/DF, J-10/A/B/C, J-11B/BH, J-15 and Su-30MK2.

In addition SD-10A is being carried by JF-17 currently in service with PAF.

 

Some specifications of SD-10 (((NOT 'A' MODEL))): length 3,850mm, diameter 203mm, wing span 674mm, weight 180kg, max g-load 38g, max speed 4M, range 60-70km.

So...

 

SD-10 is the original model, NOT carried by the JF-17.

 

LD-10 is SD-10 derivative.

 

JF-17 carries the SD-10A ("improved version") but no details as to what/how.

 

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/brief-analysis-chinas-sd-10b-air-to-air-missile.114828/

 

After SD-10 develops successfully, China continues to make the improvement, developed the SD-10A air-to-air missile, SD-10A sharpened missile's maneuver capability successfully, simultaneously strengthened the shell body intensity, the weight also increased to the nearly 200 kilograms.

 

 

Basic SD-10 (not A model) apparently weighs 180 kg.

 

 

http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.com/2013/09/chinese-sd-10a-sky-dragon-medium-range.html

 

 

Buried in the text is this:

 

 

Single Shot Kill Probability: ≥ 0.80 (fighter like targets)

Edited May 24, 2020 by Tiger-II

[AeriaGloria]

Tiger, I totally agree with you on realism and balance, and you have found some valuable info. Looking at the 3D model is such a brilliant way to find out. I concede to you I guess it is SD-10A. And as you said, there is no evidence of what changed. Very interesting, I still don’t trust most of those sources but the ingame model is irrefutable proof.

 

For example that PDEF source is just the guys personal analysis, there are no sources given. Everything but the encyclopedia seems to indicate the weight is 180kg(encyclopedia states 150, must be a typo), so I’m not sure about what they say about weight increase and strengthening.

 

But interesting that it’s likely to actually be SD-10A! I wonder if it’s a case since only one kind has been exported, most people don’t bother to say A

Edited May 24, 2020 by AeriaGloria

[SDsc0rch]

this fkkg SUXXX

 

this is TERRIBLE news!! >: (

 

let us mod the LUA files the way we want to! but don't FORCE US ALL TO BE HANDICAPPED!!!

[hamza_Khan]

JF-17 carries the SD-10A ("improved version") but no details as to what/how.

 

Can Confirm, Picture from 2018 Promotional Video: