Donau Hans Posted 14 hours ago Posted 14 hours ago (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 Edited 13 hours ago by Donau Hans 1 1
Harlikwin Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 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).
Donau Hans Posted 4 hours ago Author Posted 4 hours ago 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.
Kang Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago I don't quite understand what any of those pictures really have to do with that. Could you perhaps elaborate that?
Recommended Posts