Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

In DCS, the data for the Magic 1 missile comes from a variant before early-to-mid 1980s, whose seeker head used ordinary glass that hardly transmitted infrared light above 3 μm. Even with a liquid-nitrogen-cooled seeker, the end result would still be similar to the AIM-9B.

However, the modeling uses a seeker head with magnesium fluoride, which is opaque. It should have similar performance like AIM-9D/R-13M

 

1980matra.jpg

207504_1774585798678_1060315192_31636793_7621867_n.jpg

IMG_20250822_032821_edit_15568245189216.png

0793473.jpg

FB_IMG_1684001269884.jpg

Edited by Donau Hans
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

What exactly  is your point of contention? The 3D model is wrong? Cuz DCS doesn't model windows and Magic 1 uses a cooled PbS based seeker. 

 

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Posted

What we have in DCS is Magic I with magnesium fluoride seeker window. However, missile performs as same as early Magic I with glass window.

If you have magnesium fluoride window, you should get about 90 degrees aspect. If not, 60 degrees.

However, in DCS, Magic I had 60 degrees aspect with magnesium fluoride window. This is completely not right.

Currently Magic I should be modeled with pure glass. and we probably need a new magnesium fluoride version.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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