SD-10 downgrade

[Chiron]

why no one mention that SD-10 is downgraded ??

 

can we know what else downgraded in SD-10 except speed cuz i already test it and it downgraded ?

Edited May 20, 2020 by Chiron

[J20Stronk]

Battery life, 1st rocket stage thrust and detection cone were reduced.

 

Supersonic lift, aerodynamic multipliers and 2nd rocket stage thrust were increased.

 

Overall, it's more in line with the current AIM 120C, its drag is more believable. It's performance should be better once dual impulse motors are a thing with the missile API.

[Blinky.ben]

How much has it been downgraded by?

[J20Stronk]

It still beats the AMRAAM By about 5nm.

 

Before it would beat it by about 10nm since it would continue to fly 20 seconds longer before the battery ran out and fell fell from the sky.

 

The biggest "nerf" is definitely the battery life reduction; it now lasts as lon as an AMRAAM. Drag and Thrust are still pretty good and competitive.

[Blinky.ben]

It still beats the AMRAAM By about 5nm.

 

Before it would beat it by about 10nm since it would continue to fly 20 seconds longer before the battery ran out and fell fell from the sky.

 

The biggest "nerf" is definitely the battery life reduction; it now lasts as lon as an AMRAAM. Drag and Thrust are still pretty good and competitive.

 

I thinking out load here so please correct me if I’m wrong. But due to the SD-10 flying at high speeds the battery life shouldn’t be as of a impact as the Aim-120? Cause it’s getting to the contact faster?

[Chiron]

I thinking out load here so please correct me if I’m wrong. But due to the SD-10 flying at high speeds the battery life shouldn’t be as of a impact as the Aim-120? Cause it’s getting to the contact faster?

 

they also reduce missile speed

 

before 10nm 1.1mach speed result SD-10 flying 3.5

 

after 10nm 1.1mach speed result SD-10 flying 3.12

 

 

Test it if u like

[Tiger-II]

The biggest "nerf" is definitely the battery life reduction; it now lasts as lon as an AMRAAM. Drag and Thrust are still pretty good and competitive.

 

Is it ACCURATE though?

 

 

If the SD-10 battery can last 6 hours, I expect it to last 6 hours; not 10 seconds for "balance", or any other arcade game reason.

 

 

I thought Deka had good data on this, and that data said 100 seconds? So why reduce it suddenly?

Edited May 21, 2020 by Tiger-II

[AeriaGloria]

There’s a thread on it, I think they just said they got new data

[J20Stronk]

Is it ACCURATE though?

 

 

If the SD-10 battery can last 6 hours, I expect it to last 6 hours; not 10 seconds for "balance", or any other arcade game reason.

 

 

I thought Deka had good data on this, and that data said 100 seconds? So why reduce it suddenly?

 

IDK man. I'm gonna trust in Deka that they did some new tests or got new info on the missile.

 

I did run a couple straight line tests though:

 

 

It ultimately behaves mostly the same as before. The SD-10 does have a stronger booster stage than the 120, plus the extra sustain stage which is supposed to activate later in the loft. Once that gets added, it should be even stronger. (If Deka were to give us an SD-10A)

 

The cut in battery life did hurt it's max range, but it's still the same missile as before kinetics wise (at least in a straight line, it may be different when chasing and maneuvering)

[Chiron]

what about re acquisition i feel like chaff effecting SD-10 more than before i didn't check it 100% some couple of flying in Blueflag can someone have this information ?

[AeriaGloria]

You can check it’s CCM resistance in the LUA

[Chiron]

yes Value change from 0.012 to 0.015

 

what is that mean when this value increased

 

 

more resistance to chafe

 

or less resistance to chafe

 

from what i see.

 

SD-10 becoming a copy cat from aim-120c but faster and less guidance cuz from what i saw yesterday SD-10 got defeated the exact same way as aim-120c in Vertical diving with chaff skip the target and hug chaff

Edited May 21, 2020 by Chiron

[AeriaGloria]

I’m pretty sure there is a note on the right hand side of the LUA line that explains what the number means. If it doesn’t you can always compare with something else, wish the AMRAAM file wasn’t so hard to find

[AeriaGloria]

It looks like that is a 25% decrease in resistance https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2649118&postcount=5

 

Which is very surprising to me, the initial value is the same as R-77, a much older missile. Whether Agat helped Luoyang or not you would expect its seeker to be either as resistant as R-77 or slightly better, not worse. Now I need to check if R-77 was changed

[SuumCuique]

I tested the new FM against a Tacview of the pre-patch SD-10.

 

Launch conditions were similarish:

 

Old: 27000 ft, Mach 0.87, distance 39.00 nm

New: 27500 ft, Mach 0.92, distance 38.30 nm

 

The SD-10 loses speed more quickly after the burst phase but overall it has a fairly similar performance, except that the Mach curve looks more believable, the old one was almost linear. The biggest loss of range will be due to the loss of battery life, especially when combined with the slightly slower missile.

[Tango3B]

yes Value change from 0.012 to 0.015

 

what is that mean when this value increased

 

 

more resistance to chafe

 

or less resistance to chafe

 

from what i see.

 

SD-10 becoming a copy cat from aim-120c but faster and less guidance cuz from what i saw yesterday SD-10 got defeated the exact same way as aim-120c in Vertical diving with chaff skip the target and hug chaff

 

 

 

Sorry Chiron, but the value for CCM resistance did NOT change! I keep track of that particular value since the module has been released and 0.15 as CCM value for the SD-10 has been there for ages. The only missile in Deka's "arsenal" to have a CCM value of 0.12 is the PL-12 and that one is not available to us. You must have mixed that up, I am afraid.

 

 

 

The CCM values range from 1 to 0, as far as I am aware. A CCM value of 1 would be an absolut chaff magnet whereas 0.15 original 0.12 for SD-10 and PL-12 is actually pretty decent in DCS. The PL-5EII i.e. has a CCM value of 0.5 and is spoofed by flares pretty easily, as you might know. The AIM-54 in its current state has 0.5, too which makes it go for chaff rather quickly.

 

 

 

Overall, I must say the recent "nerf" with its slight reduction in range is acceptable. It does not break the missile in overall performance from what I have seen so far. And please remember that neither the F-16 nor the F/A-18 currently have a working steering dot for a valid missile shot so their AIM-120s use up a lot of energy from the start. We in our JF-17, however, can always launch our SD-10s in the most energy efficient way possible which gives again increased performance.:D

[Chiron]

Sorry Chiron, but the value for CCM resistance did NOT change! I keep track of that particular value since the module has been released and 0.15 as CCM value for the SD-10 has been there for ages. The only missile in Deka's "arsenal" to have a CCM value of 0.12 is the PL-12 and that one is not available to us. You must have mixed that up, I am afraid.

 

 

 

The CCM values range from 1 to 0, as far as I am aware. A CCM value of 1 would be an absolut chaff magnet whereas 0.15 original 0.12 for SD-10 and PL-12 is actually pretty decent in DCS. The PL-5EII i.e. has a CCM value of 0.5 and is spoofed by flares pretty easily, as you might know. The AIM-54 in its current state has 0.5, too which makes it go for chaff rather quickly.

 

 

 

Overall, I must say the recent "nerf" with its slight reduction in range is acceptable. It does not break the missile in overall performance from what I have seen so far. And please remember that neither the F-16 nor the F/A-18 currently have a working steering dot for a valid missile shot so their AIM-120s use up a lot of energy from the start. We in our JF-17, however, can always launch our SD-10s in the most energy efficient way possible which gives again increased performance.:D

 

why sorry lol i still happy i just was upset about life battery cuz our advantage in range shooting that is why i asked what else downgraded and for chaff looks like u are right maybe i saw the wrong lua

Edited May 21, 2020 by Chiron

[Tango3B]

why sorry lol i still happy i just was upset about life battery cuz our advantage in range shooting that is why i asked what else downgraded and for chaff looks like u are right maybe i saw the wrong lua

 

 

Don't worry, we still have the edge in BVR combat. We just need to be a little more cautious and aware of our actual performance data. My reply was just a heads up to put it right. Have a nice day, dude. :D

[Airhunter]

Overall a pretty good change, which brings it a bit closer to the reals of reality. Previously its drag was stupidly low (to indirectly account for the boost and sustain phase I guess).

[Airhunter]

Sorry Chiron, but the value for CCM resistance did NOT change! I keep track of that particular value since the module has been released and 0.15 as CCM value for the SD-10 has been there for ages. The only missile in Deka's "arsenal" to have a CCM value of 0.12 is the PL-12 and that one is not available to us. You must have mixed that up, I am afraid.

 

 

 

The CCM values range from 1 to 0, as far as I am aware. A CCM value of 1 would be an absolut chaff magnet whereas 0.15 original 0.12 for SD-10 and PL-12 is actually pretty decent in DCS. The PL-5EII i.e. has a CCM value of 0.5 and is spoofed by flares pretty easily, as you might know. The AIM-54 in its current state has 0.5, too which makes it go for chaff rather quickly.

 

 

 

Overall, I must say the recent "nerf" with its slight reduction in range is acceptable. It does not break the missile in overall performance from what I have seen so far. And please remember that neither the F-16 nor the F/A-18 currently have a working steering dot for a valid missile shot so their AIM-120s use up a lot of energy from the start. We in our JF-17, however, can always launch our SD-10s in the most energy efficient way possible which gives again increased performance.:D

 

Yep, especially the AIM-54 needs to be more in like with say the 120B in terms of chaff resistance, especially the C shouldn't really go for chaff at all.

[Tiger-II]

It looks like that is a 25% decrease in resistance https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2649118&postcount=5

 

Which is very surprising to me, the initial value is the same as R-77, a much older missile. Whether Agat helped Luoyang or not you would expect its seeker to be either as resistant as R-77 or slightly better, not worse. Now I need to check if R-77 was changed

 

 

Interesting.

[Tiger-II]

whereas 0.15 original 0.12 for SD-10

 

 

So it was changed since release??

[AeriaGloria]

So it was changed since release??

 

Look at the previous posts , Chiron was looking at the PL-12 LUA, which naturally since its not for export has slightly higher specs

[Tiger-II]

Look at the previous posts , Chiron was looking at the PL-12 LUA, which naturally since its not for export has slightly higher specs

 

 

I did. Read my quote in my previous reply. He says it was 0.12 now 0.15.

 

 

So he was simply looking at the wrong missile?

[AeriaGloria]

I did read it, they were looking at PL-12, there are two separate missiles with different files, SD-10 and PL-12. SD-10 is export, PL-12 is not for export with higher specs, that is what Tango was referring to.

 

whereas 0.15 original 0.12 for SD-10 and PL-12

Here he is referring to them in sequence, .12 for PL and .15 for SD Edited May 21, 2020 by AeriaGloria