Magic 1 performance

[Lascar12F]

Hi all,

I've been having a blast flying this module but the magic 1 performance seems very off.

Looking at tacview files it seems the missile only pulls around 8Gs, which is about the same as a GAR8.

Public information available says the missile should be able to do in the neighborhood of 35Gs, which seems believable since the Magic II is known as a very very maneuverable missile, and the two share the same body and fins, the later missile simply having a different seeker and 10% more powerfull motor.

 

Would an aerges dev care to comment on this ? Is the low maneuverability of the missile intended on your end or is it an oversight ?

[fausete]

Hi, the behaviour and performance of the armament once it leaves the aircraft is ED's responsability.

[Lascar12F]

Oh understood, thanks for the reply.
Is that an issue that has been brought to ED's attention by you guys ?

Edited Monday at 10:43 PM by Lascar12F

[IvanK]

The Magic I min range versus Angle off was at the time of its introduction perhaps the best in the world with the Missile and gun envelope inside the turn overlapping.... like an Rmin at 55deg Angle off 4Hm with a 7G target.

Edited Monday at 10:20 PM by IvanK

[Lascar12F]

yeah what you're saying is in line with what i've been told about the missile and what it should realistically be able to do, which begs the question, why does it perform like a GAR8 in DCS ? It's essentially worthless right now. The 9-J is much much better in the sim, not even the JULI but the J...
Is this something that ED is aware of and working towards fixing ? or is the Magic 1 just forgotten because the Magic 2 is there and works ?

[DSplayer]

8 hours ago, Lascar12F said:

yeah what you're saying is in line with what i've been told about the missile and what it should realistically be able to do, which begs the question, why does it perform like a GAR8 in DCS ? It's essentially worthless right now. The 9-J is much much better in the sim, not even the JULI but the J...
Is this something that ED is aware of and working towards fixing ? or is the Magic 1 just forgotten because the Magic 2 is there and works ?

Please provide a short SP track of the situation you're encountering. The Magic 1 last had a change in May of 2024.

[Lascar12F]

sure here you go, tell me if you require any more tracks. The missile seems to systematically stop tracking the target as it gets close even though it has the energy and the aspect is still rear. In one of the attached track it is compared to a 9J.

magic 1 vs 9J no tracking.trk no flare rear close magic 1.trk

[Bremspropeller]

On a tangent: When loading Magic 1 missiles, a Magic 2 model is actually loaded (with a notch in the rear fins).

[DSplayer]

On 5/27/2025 at 12:51 PM, Lascar12F said:

sure here you go, tell me if you require any more tracks. The missile seems to systematically stop tracking the target as it gets close even though it has the energy and the aspect is still rear. In one of the attached track it is compared to a 9J.

magic 1 vs 9J no tracking.trk 395.1 kB · 0 downloads no flare rear close magic 1.trk 288.62 kB · 0 downloads

In the first track ("magic 1 vs 9J no tracking.trk") the Magic 1 loses track because the target moves such that it isn't rear aspect anymore. The AIM-9J tracks because it has better side aspect performance than the Magic 1 (max trackable aspect of ~103 degrees vs ~63 degrees off tail respectively).

I personally don't know what's being demonstrated in the second track ("no flare rear close magic 1.trk") but if it's the target aspect thing, I would expect it to be the same as the first track.

Edited 6 hours ago by DSplayer

[IvanK]

IRL Magic I can still  track front quarter as long as the IR source is still there and gimble limits are not exceeded. Fusing is obviously the issue with Magic I.

Magic I seeker sensitivity was good enough to get lock  at 90 degrees Angle Off on a Mil powered target 700deg C JPT at 2nm at medium altitude, so not sure what the 63deg aspect thing is about.

[DSplayer]

2 hours ago, IvanK said:

IRL Magic I can still  track front quarter as long as the IR source is still there and gimble limits are not exceeded. Fusing is obviously the issue with Magic I.

Magic I seeker sensitivity was good enough to get lock  at 90 degrees Angle Off on a Mil powered target 700deg C JPT at 2nm at medium altitude, so not sure what the 63deg aspect thing is about.

Perhaps it would be good to write a bug report on that issue of it underperforming in-game since the values I used are pulled from the lua definitions.

Edited 4 hours ago by DSplayer