SD-10 NERF?

[Chiron]

Correct me if i am wrong Chizh i am not good with math and physic stuff but why u think that your CFD is correct . as i recall aim-120 family before Deka release SD-10 was in a shitty situation according to your CFD and u didn't change the missile until SD-10 show up why we should trust your CFD ?

 

and i am not saying i am right i am asking

[Chizh]

Correct me if i am wrong Chizh i am not good with math and physic stuff but why u think that your CFD is correct . as i recall aim-120 family before Deka release SD-10 was in a shitty situation according to your CFD and u didn't change the missile until SD-10 show up why we should trust your CFD ?

 

and i am not saying i am right i am asking

You do not have to believe in anything of course.

[Max1mus]

I understand what you mean and that makes sense but the battery in the SD-10 seems to die while there is still a lot of energy to be able to intercept targets. Multiple people are posting tracks and pictures with the SD10 tracking and closing in on contacts with heaps of energy but then just stops tracking.

 

I just posted one with AIM-120C doing the same. This is weird. Would like Chizh to explain.

[Chiron]

You do not have to believe in anything of course.

 

:lol: u are unusual person Chizh :megalol: u killed me with this comment

 

i am just asking cuz from what i saw Aim-120 performance before boosting up was done by the same CFD what change ?

[Chizh]

:lol: u are unusual person Chizh :megalol: u killed me with this comment

 

i am just asking cuz from what i saw Aim-120 performance before boosting up was done by the same CFD what change ?

We completely overhaul the AMRAAM flight dynamics. In June, it will be available in open beta. Then will be sense to talk about it.

[Chizh]

[ATTACH]236814[/ATTACH]

 

Well, like here for example. A 190km AIM-120C arrives at mach 3+ (higher speed than AIM-54 btw). And this is still a somewhat moderate altitude and speed, F-15 can go higher and faster and the target could also be higher.

 

Is this normal?

Track isn't working at my PC. Just a few seconds in the cockpit of the MiG-21 and end.

[Chiron]

We completely overhaul the AMRAAM flight dynamics. In June, it will be available in open beta. Then will be sense to talk about it.

 

so u are saying that there is another update for AMRAAM coming and SD-10 got nerfed ?

[Max1mus]

Track isn't working at my PC. Just a few seconds in the cockpit of the MiG-21 and end.

 

It didnt record the track but created a tacview. It doesnt seem like i can share tacviews via the forum file upload.

 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/rgmae7eopzbpnwq/Tacview-20200523-163419-DCS.zip.acmi/file

 

Anyway this is the tacview. 190km DCS AIM-120C with mach 3.4 on arrival.

[Tj1376]

I want to clarify the situation a bit to reduce the amount of insinuations.

 

We investigated the SD-10 model in CFD and compared the data on the drag coefficient with what would be in the game. After which we wrote our recommendations in Deca.

 

Let's discuss PL-12/SD-10 zero-lift drag.

 

 

Fig. 1 shows in-game drag curve (before corrections) and CFD one. As you can see here is a major error at supersonic speed - decreased zero-lift drag about 30% from CFD and high peak around transsonic.

CFD data is obtained on 3.9M elements good quality mesh using SA-turbulence model. Coeffs referenced to 0.0324 sq.m area.

 

We sent these results to the Deca, after which we obtain a missile correction.

 

 

As you can see, the gap in the supersonic part has decreased by about half. In the transonic region, the peak has grown even more.

 

This means that the missiles at high altitudes and speeds continues to fly better than the CFD one.

 

Whats the difference between Cxo and Cdo in the two graphs? The two graphs have a different Y axis label and different values.

 

I honestly have no idea about anything CFD related, so please dont take this as me being upset. The thread is getting kind of hostile and I dont want to be associated with the hostility. Im just trying to learn why the labels on the Y axis for both graphs are different. Maybe a conversion thing from imperical units to metric units?

 

TJ

[Chizh]

so u are saying that there is another update for AMRAAM coming and SD-10 got nerfed ?

Why nerfed?

We try to make missiles so close to real prototypes.

[sora_061]

Since big boyz are getting overhauled. What about R-27s, 77?

 

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

[wilky510]

:lol: u are unusual person Chizh :megalol: u killed me with this comment

 

i am just asking cuz from what i saw Aim-120 performance before boosting up was done by the same CFD what change ?

 

 

Are you new around here? The AMRAAM/R-27 got their current "model" from a long time ago, things technology wise has progressed. They can now do more in depth CFD research on the matter. No conspiracy theories, stop looking for some.

 

 

Also, they said they would revisit the AMRAAM way before the SD-10 came around. I would think the SD-10 did help accelerate the process though. Nothing more, nothing less. Both the R-27/AIM-120 have needed an update for a while now (R-77 included).

 

 

 

They do, everything is balanced in DCS, nothing is like RL, this is a game.

If i think that was the case the R-27EA would've stayed in the game from Lockon days and the AMRAAM would've stayed in it's old, more lethal range back in FC2 days before they did the more realistic research for the current missile simulation we have now. Also if that was the case ED would've told Heatblur no to the AIM-54 being in the game..

 

 

There is a good balanced gamemode in the game though; AIM-7/R-27R "1970's" is a good, balanced era but it's not a popular game mode for whatever reason.

Edited May 23, 2020 by wilky510

[wilky510]

Since big boyz are getting overhauled. What about R-27s, 77?

 

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

Will be revisited. Chizh even says so in this thread.

[riojax]

Battery life is calculated on the flight range where the missile has a high probability of target intercepting. It makes no sense to make the battery longer, because the inertial missile system will not allow you to reach the interception point.

 

Ok, well... please, can you explain based on real proofs why now the battery life is 80s and not 100s as before?

 

And yes, it's a game changer:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4341195&postcount=9

[Chizh]

Whats the difference between Cxo and Cdo in the two graphs? The two graphs have a different Y axis label and different values.

CD0 is western zero-lift drag coefficient.

Cx0 - is accepted designation zero-lift drag coefficient in Russia.

CD0 = Cx0

Sorry for some inconsistency.

 

CD0 was calculated relative to the mid-section of the missile.

Cx0 was calculated relative to a wing area (​​0.9 square meters), as historically developed in the DCS. Therefore, different numbers.

[Tj1376]

CD0 is western zero-lift drag coefficient.

Cx0 - is accepted designation zero-lift drag coefficient in Russia.

CD0 = Cx0

Sorry for some inconsistency.

 

CD0 was calculated relative to the mid-section of the missile.

Cx0 was calculated relative to a wing area (​​0.9 square meters), as historically developed in the DCS. Therefore, different numbers.

Many thank yous!

 

TJ

[Chizh]

It didnt record the track but created a tacview. It doesnt seem like i can share tacviews via the forum file upload.

 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/rgmae7eopzbpnwq/Tacview-20200523-163419-DCS.zip.acmi/file

 

Anyway this is the tacview. 190km DCS AIM-120C with mach 3.4 on arrival.

Sorry, but we cannot analyze and debug the tacview. Only proper TRK from game.

[Chizh]

Ok, well... please, can you explain based on real proofs why now the battery life is 80s and not 100s as before?

I can not say anything about SD-10 battery. We have not any data.

[Chiron]

Did you demand proof from Deka when it was 100? Or do you only care now because it was a nerf?

 

Its pretty hypocritical that people are demanding proof to justify nerfs when no one demanded proof from Deka for the previous model or performance, just took their word for it. Its pretty obvious that people here are more concerned about having the edge vs the AIM-120 rather than ensuring accuracy.

 

Unless you have a post demanding Deka prove their SD-10 performance, this is pure hypocritical BS, no one had *any* evidence that the missile was right before hand.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4142982&postcount=5

 

is this a proof for u ??????????????????????

 

dont tell me u want a military proof from Deka

Edited May 23, 2020 by Chiron

[riojax]

We investigated the SD-10 model in CFD and compared the data on the drag coefficient with what would be in the game. After which we wrote our recommendations in Deca.

 

Let's discuss PL-12/SD-10 zero-lift drag.

[...]

 

We sent these results to the Deca, after which we obtain a missile correction.

[...]

 

As you can see, the gap in the supersonic part has decreased by about half. In the transonic region, the peak has grown even more.

 

This means that the missiles at high altitudes and speeds continues to fly better than the CFD one.

 

Please, can you give me some light on that?

 

I don't want to make wrong assumptions, by that expose the public timeline:

1. ED do some SD-10 CFD's

2. ED sends recommendations to Deka

3. Deka do some fixes

4. Seems some controversial for the community

5. ???

6. ED take over Deka's (and others 3rd parties) missile development

 

As a customer, please, can you explain me what happened on the step 5?

 

Thank you,

Regards.

[riojax]

I can not say anything about SD-10 battery. We have not any data.

 

Uhmm, and then why it was lowered to 80 seconds?

[Chiron]

Uhmm, and then why it was lowered to 80 seconds?

 

i have not know about work-time of the SD-10 power system.

But I suspect that it should be something like AMRAAM. It makes no sense to do longer because an inertial system produces unacceptable errors.

that was Chizh words not mine

[Chiron]

Uh... no?

 

You basically proved my point though. Deka said "Its X" with no supporting documents and you *immediately* believe its true. You are not *asking* for evidence from them, you are taking what they say as evidence. You don't see the hypocrisy there?

 

i am sorry what documents u want ?

 

can u ask ED to share their military document ??

 

can u ask Razbam to share their military document ??

 

are u a dreamer or something ?

[Chizh]

Uhmm, and then why it was lowered to 80 seconds?

I don't know.

[Chizh]

Please, can you give me some light on that?

 

I don't want to make wrong assumptions, by that expose the public timeline:

1. ED do some SD-10 CFD's

2. ED sends recommendations to Deka

3. Deka do some fixes

4. Seems some controversial for the community

5. ???

6. ED take over Deka's (and others 3rd parties) missile development

 

As a customer, please, can you explain me what happened on the step 5?

 

Thank you,

Regards.

We have not yet taken and are not planning to develop the SD-10. But in the future we plan to make all weapons for all modules ourselves in ED studio.