Bug?

[GGTharos]

Make your point after you run the math.

Here's a helpful hint: Look for minizap.

[combatace]

See I have datasheets of missiles of both the missiles manufacturers so there's no need for me to do math. But ER will travel 100Km than Aim will make it till 90Km and thats not me datasheets say that.

[GGTharos]

Here's another helpful hint: Manufacturer's data sheets were not useful for modeling missiles :)

 

See I have datasheets of missiles of both the missiles manufacturers so there's no need for me to do math. But ER will travel 100Km than Aim will make it till 90Km and thats not me datasheets say that.

[combatace]

Than there's nothing for me to say more. First time in my life have I heard that manufacturers datasheets are wrong.

[GGTharos]

They give you a datapoint at unknown parameters. Of what use is that?

I may as well tell you that a MiG-29 can pull 9G. So what? What does it tell you, other than it can pull 9G? Nothing.

It doesn't tell you at what airspeeds and altitudes it can do it, it doesn't tell you what the stores limitations for it are or the gross weight it can do it at. That's what manufacturer's datasheets tell you: Nothing.

 

If you want to understand how missiles operate, you need to dig a lot deeper.

 

Here's an example of something much more useful, though it doesn't tell you how the missile behaves - only what your usage limitations are - still far more useful than a manufacturer's datasheet.

 

This is for R-27R1.

 

 

 

Than there's nothing for me to say more. First time in my life have I heard that manufacturers datasheets are wrong.

Edited April 7, 2010 by GGTharos

[Total]

I have looked at the manufacture sheets and, well, they give you alot of useful information, but it's up to you to take that data and run the equations for performance.

 

I can tell you that a car can sustain speeds of 140MPH.

 

Ok, so does that mean it can sustain those speeds in a tight turn? Can is sustain those speeds in windy weather? How about at higher elevation terrain? heck, can it sustain them uphill?

 

As a veteran and someone who worked military avionics research and development for a decade, I can say this with 100% confidence:

 

The datasheets aren't wrong, but you are reading the scant information they give as all encompassing.

[combatace]

No manufacturer is going to tell you anything without testing it.

 

Here's what I tell you I make a jet and give it to you without testing it you won't fly in it because it is not tested because I can't give you any datasheet as I have not tested it. Datasheets are made based on the testing and are not theoretical. This is weaponry no game that can be delivered without testing.

 

And for your kind information if you are so telling me that AIMs will fly longer why did ED itself set it lower than ERs range??????? I said it because I found it less than real. So you have anything more to say on this??????

[Total]

There's plenty to say, but to someone who won't listen ;)

 

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/rms/documents/content/rtn_rms_ps_amraam_datasheet.pdf

 

Raytheon AIM-120 C7 Datasheet.

 

That's a very generic datasheet. VERY generic. It lists none of the technical specifications.

 

To give you an idea of how deep REAL data sheets go, here's a simple one. The datasheet for a common opamp used in MANY audio devices. The 4560 series opamp.

 

http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/rc4560.pdf

 

That's a consumer grade, simple opamp and the datasheet is 11 pages.

 

What Raytheon posted as the datasheet for the AIM-120 C7 is actually an Information Brochure. You are getting NONE of the technical performance data in that "datasheet" The data you are trying to compare is not going to be found in a short pdf file. It's going to be found in a series of manuals, TRD's, ECO histories, ICD's, etc They are a pain to compile (I've done them for systems in the F-15, F-18, V-22, C-130, F-16, etc) yet they give all of the comprehensive data you think you are gathering from short brochures from the internet ;)

Edited April 7, 2010 by Total

[Stangpilot]

There's plenty to say, but to someone who won't listen ;)

 

Exactly, he's already made up his mind he knows more than the sim producers, even though the game producers have tons more data, a small part of which has been posted.

 

Just give it up. You are just confusing the guy with facts.

[Ven]

Performance is something datasheet can't prove. Many sports cars would give you 0 to 60 performance but doesn't state all the variables. Condition of the track, air temperature, track temperature, type and brand of the tire... all of which are important information which cannot be identical between manufacturers who measured them at different conditions. You just can't say that the Porche is faster than Ferrari just because 0-60 says so. That's why a lot of the side by side comparison results by publishers sometimes come out to be different.

 

But I do agree that facts such as the weight should be looked at.

[combatace]

But I do agree that facts such as the weight should be looked at.

 

That was what I wanted to say but he stuck on to ER. I think he just wanted to pull the thread away from the real problems and focus on the matter which is debate since decades.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[combatace]

Exactly, he's already made up his mind he knows more than the sim producers, even though the game producers have tons more data, a small part of which has been posted.

 

Just give it up. You are just confusing the guy with facts.

 

Why would he argue anyway when the lot of data carrying ED has set ER's range more than AIM-120C's?

I was having problem that in BVR duel F-15C would launch its AIM-120C long before I get a launch cue for my R-27ERs and that AIM would even have energy to hit me even though I'm moving my nose at around 7Gs. He would lauch it at some thing 90Km and I can get can my LA only at 75Km. Both same speed, altitude and head on.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[combatace]

There's plenty to say, but to someone who won't listen ;)

 

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/rms/documents/content/rtn_rms_ps_amraam_datasheet.pdf

 

Raytheon AIM-120 C7 Datasheet.

 

That's a very generic datasheet. VERY generic. It lists none of the technical specifications.

 

To give you an idea of how deep REAL data sheets go, here's a simple one. The datasheet for a common opamp used in MANY audio devices. The 4560 series opamp.

 

http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/rc4560.pdf

 

That's a consumer grade, simple opamp and the datasheet is 11 pages.

 

What Raytheon posted as the datasheet for the AIM-120 C7 is actually an Information Brochure. You are getting NONE of the technical performance data in that "datasheet" The data you are trying to compare is not going to be found in a short pdf file. It's going to be found in a series of manuals, TRD's, ECO histories, ICD's, etc They are a pain to compile (I've done them for systems in the F-15, F-18, V-22, C-130, F-16, etc) yet they give all of the comprehensive data you think you are gathering from short brochures from the internet ;)

 

I don't know what you do but I'm an electrical engineer so I have seen lots of those sheets and I very well know what do they mean.

Should I give you the list of missiles and bombs whose diameter and weight are miss coded.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[Total]

Well good, then you should know that you can't rely on informational brochures as the data needed to specify an accurate model. That's like putting only the VCC and Rf variables for a 4560 configured as an amplifier into Spice and expecting it to give you an accurate output reading (ie leaving out Ri, input signal freq, amplitude, etc).

 

GG did address weight. He addressed it in the most direct way possible.

 

Weight changes as the missile burns fuel. At full load, the missile's velocity is going to be less than it will be a half fuel load. Hal fwill be less than it will be at 1/4 fuel load. Until it runs out of fuel, it is providing the same amount of thrust. As weight decreases, thrust remains the same, speed and range increase.

 

While that's pretty straight forward, two things the brochure does not state is the total fuel load and the fuel consumption rate of the AIM-120. This can greatly extend the range of a missile without compromising speed.

 

From my own experience, the AIM-120 is under-modeled. Actually, the capabilities of the F-15C with it's combat electronics suite is under modeled. If it were modeled correctly, it would probably be the dominant aircraft in the game. For the sake of balance, I am thankful it's under modeled.

 

Now, all of that said - a great combat pilot in a lesser aircraft can come out on top of a mediocre pilot in a far superior aircraft. You can give a person every system capability, but if they are not proficient with it, then they are not superior ;)

Edited April 7, 2010 by Total

[SFJackBauer]

The aircraft Fire Control Computer should give the right cues to the pilot. If you are like Mach 2 and your target is head on Mach 2, then of course you will be able to fire at them a lot earlier than if the target were accelerating away from you.

 

Now, the manufacturers say the max range of the missile is 130km... right. Under what conditions? What is the speed of the launching and of the target, and the aspect between them? Altitude? Without these other variables, it is impossible to compare two missile performances. Remember that the military details are classified, no manufacturer ever is going to disclose it to everybody. They give a "ballpark" number only.

 

Missile envelopes are as dynamic as aircraft ones. Actually, knowing the missile propelant quantity, specific impulse, missile weight and drag coefficients is a better (perhaps the only?) way to construct a working simulation than picking up the range on manufacturers website.

 

Remember the range is a result of an equation, not an input.

[Total]

Referencing the first post - Raytheon's information brochure gives the weight of several variants of the AGM-65 Mav's.

 

The 360kg launch weight sounds more like the AGM-88 HARM's launch weight (I could be wrong, just pulling data outta my skull I haven't looked at in years lol)

[Wolf Rider]

Than there's nothing for me to say more. First time in my life have I heard that manufacturers datasheets are wrong.

 

 

welcome to the real world... MDS are always done for optimum conditions and theoretical maximums.

[GGTharos]

Not necessarily ... I mean, the trend for US missiles seems to be med-hi altitude intercepts at nominal speeds, while the Russian brochures seem to advocate LEO aproaches for the launch, both in altitude and speed.

[Stangpilot]

Well good, then you should know that you can't rely on informational brochures as the data needed to specify an accurate model. That's like putting only the VCC and Rf variables for a 4560 configured as an amplifier into Spice and expecting it to give you an accurate output reading (ie leaving out Ri, input signal freq, amplitude, etc).

 

GG did address weight. He addressed it in the most direct way possible.

 

Weight changes as the missile burns fuel. At full load, the missile's velocity is going to be less than it will be a half fuel load. Hal fwill be less than it will be at 1/4 fuel load. Until it runs out of fuel, it is providing the same amount of thrust. As weight decreases, thrust remains the same, speed and range increase.

 

While that's pretty straight forward, two things the brochure does not state is the total fuel load and the fuel consumption rate of the AIM-120. This can greatly extend the range of a missile without compromising speed.

 

From my own experience, the AIM-120 is under-modeled. Actually, the capabilities of the F-15C with it's combat electronics suite is under modeled. If it were modeled correctly, it would probably be the dominant aircraft in the game. For the sake of balance, I am thankful it's under modeled.

 

Now, all of that said - a great combat pilot in a lesser aircraft can come out on top of a mediocre pilot in a far superior aircraft. You can give a person every system capability, but if they are not proficient with it, then they are not superior ;)

 

Awesome post, perfect explanation

[combatace]

Not necessarily ... I mean, the trend for US missiles seems to be med-hi altitude intercepts at nominal speeds, while the Russian brochures seem to advocate LEO aproaches for the launch, both in altitude and speed.

 

Now how come LEO come over there? It is defines from around 180-2000Km above the Earth's

surface. Source NASA.

[GGTharos]

That's right.

They drop Su-27 from ISS, Su-27 launched R-27ERs upon re-entry ;)

 

Now how come LEO come over there? It is defines from around 180-2000Km above the Earth's

surface. Source NASA.

[combatace]

Well good, then you should know that you can't rely on informational brochures as the data needed to specify an accurate model. That's like putting only the VCC and Rf variables for a 4560 configured as an amplifier into Spice and expecting it to give you an accurate output reading (ie leaving out Ri, input signal freq, amplitude, etc).

 

GG did address weight. He addressed it in the most direct way possible.

 

Weight changes as the missile burns fuel. At full load, the missile's velocity is going to be less than it will be a half fuel load. Hal fwill be less than it will be at 1/4 fuel load. Until it runs out of fuel, it is providing the same amount of thrust. As weight decreases, thrust remains the same, speed and range increase.

 

While that's pretty straight forward, two things the brochure does not state is the total fuel load and the fuel consumption rate of the AIM-120. This can greatly extend the range of a missile without compromising speed.

 

From my own experience, the AIM-120 is under-modeled. Actually, the capabilities of the F-15C with it's combat electronics suite is under modeled. If it were modeled correctly, it would probably be the dominant aircraft in the game. For the sake of balance, I am thankful it's under modeled.

 

Now, all of that said - a great combat pilot in a lesser aircraft can come out on top of a mediocre pilot in a far superior aircraft. You can give a person every system capability, but if they are not proficient with it, then they are not superior ;)

 

Have you gone nuts when a person talks about the weight of a missile he will talk of it unburnt and not burnt and I meant that too. and by weight I was not talking about AIM-120C, I was talking about AGM-65s. Read the thread carefully man from where it started.

[GGTharos]

He is referencing my reference to FUEL-TO-MASS ratio of a missile. ANY missile, but particularly important for AAMs.

 

Have you gone nuts when a person talks about the weight of a missile he will talk of it unburnt and not burnt and I meant that too. and by weight I was not talking about AIM-120C, I was talking about AGM-65s. Read the thread carefully man from where it started.

[combatace]

That's right.

They drop Su-27 from ISS, Su-27 launched R-27ERs upon re-entry ;)

 

What are you talking? Have you gone insane or are you trying to make me one. If you are trying to do it the other way tell me I'll stop posting here.

[GGTharos]

What are you talking? Have you gone insane or are you trying to make me one. If you are trying to do it the other way tell me I'll stop posting here.

 

Explanation:

 

It's joke. You're supposed to laugh along with taking a little hint regarding manufacturer's datasheets.