Jump to content

Aim-54 track issues


Tinysnipe

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, DarksydeRob said:


Ah I see. So its not utilizing it fully yet. Looking forward to when it uses the new FM and full Seeker logic like the Sparrow , SD-10 and AMRAAM.

 

It is fully utilizing what we set out to when we were talking "missile api". Anything else is out of our hands and not something we have been part of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IronMike said:


There will be no new FM for the phoenix. There is nothing wrong with its FM, in fact it is one of the most accurate missile FMs in DCS. That's all in the whitepaper.

As for seeker logic, that's up to ED, not us.

What about the horrible high G/AOA random wobble they make when they go active, they bleed so much energy when that happens...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Love_Beam said:

What about the horrible high G/AOA random wobble they make when they go active, they bleed so much energy when that happens...

 

 

They shouldnt anymore, not that excessively. But that is completely guidance related, not performance or FM. It's how missiles in DCS work, in a way, when active or not active. With the other missiles it isnt as obvious, as the range is much smaller, the deviation and adjustments therefore, too. What seems to be lacking a bit is a mid-term guidance that would allow for a smoother transition between non active and active. For example, if you shoot a phoenix close in, you shouldnt notice the behavior in the same way. Unfortunately we have only limited access to anything guidance related.


Edited by IronMike

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IronMike said:

They shouldnt anymore, not that excessively. But that is completely guidance related, not performance or FM. It's how missiles in DCS work, in a way, when active or not active. With the other missiles it isnt as obvious, as the range is much smaller, the deviation and adjustments therefore, too. What seems to be lacking a bit is a mid-term guidance that would allow for a smoother transition between non active and active. For example, if you shoot a phoenix close in, you shouldnt notice the behavior in the same way. Unfortunately we have only limited access to anything guidance related.

 

Hi IM, I would suggest that you apply the whitepaper to the new missiles FM, as phoenix is still using the old - unless I'm wrong! 🙂  I can help with that if you want but probably it would be better for ED to fine tune it.

 

There's also no huge hurry to do this, but I think you would definitely see some subtle differences, especially in terminal.


Edited by GGTharos
  • Thanks 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DarksydeRob said:


Ah I see. So its not utilizing it fully yet. Looking forward to when it uses the new FM and full Seeker logic like the Sparrow , SD-10 and AMRAAM.

 

 

I must apologize, Rob, indeed it turns out we are using an old FM environment, and need to update it. However the FM as such will not change, indeed, the data "just needs to be transferred", to simplify it. So you were correct in a way, it doesn't fully utilize the "new FM" yet, or more precisely not new FM, but new way of how the FM gets implemented into the sim. We need to see how to go about this, we will likely have to do it together with ED.

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IronMike said:

 

 

I must apologize, Rob, indeed it turns out we are using an old FM environment, and need to update it. However the FM as such will not change, indeed, the data "just needs to be transferred", to simplify it. So you were correct in a way, it doesn't fully utilize the "new FM" yet, or more precisely not new FM, but new way of how the FM gets implemented into the sim. We need to see how to go about this, we will likely have to do it together with ED.


ahhh I see , looking foward to it . Hope ED can put the time to implementing it with you guys in the near future so that we can see the true form of the 54 like we have seen with the 120.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2020 at 5:12 PM, IronMike said:

 

 

They shouldnt anymore, not that excessively. But that is completely guidance related, not performance or FM. It's how missiles in DCS work, in a way, when active or not active. With the other missiles it isnt as obvious, as the range is much smaller, the deviation and adjustments therefore, too. What seems to be lacking a bit is a mid-term guidance that would allow for a smoother transition between non active and active. For example, if you shoot a phoenix close in, you shouldnt notice the behavior in the same way. Unfortunately we have only limited access to anything guidance related.

 

Here is what I'm taking about Iron Mike, watch at the :24 mark

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that's the mid term guidance. It seems it is due to our FM still using an older way of implementation, and we need to adjust that together with ED.

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...