New MIGs are coolers

[Shinigami]

... and you complain about reading US propaganda :) No F-15's or F-18's were hit over Kosovo, and the only F-16 that was confirmed to be hit was downed by a SAM. The F-117 was downed by an SA-3, not a MiG. The MiGs never hit anything in that conflict.

 

 

I prefer service manuals; then you find out just how trusted a lot of these sites are. We even have missile exmployment charts and fire control operation. ;)

 

I strongly suggest finding much more robust sources for your thesis.

 

No for my thesis I told you that I have other info.

 

And the page of the bad translation was a error of mine of some info I was reading and just paste it without knowing it, cause I was multitasking:D

[Shinigami]

Also one question for the ED Team you guys model the missiles mathematically or with IF(programing) or you do both method??? (both method in the same tread) like wen the missile change the seeker method

 

For example if you fire a R-77 in short distance it will launch in active mode, but if jammed by the target it will change for passive mode, you also take in count the math's equations for example the turns ratio or the density of the air flow.

is for other examples part of the thesis.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Shinigami

[GGTharos]

Nowhere, because he probably doesn't exist :D

 

Also were is the guy that alway come and say that the F-117 is impossible to shotdown....

[GGTharos]

Missiles have very simple modeling and it isn't very realistic. It is good enough to give you some reasonable idea of BVR as long as you understand that you cannot use some tactics with them due to modeling limitations of the flight model.

 

There are other, separate issues with the seeker, and this 'switching to passive mode' thing is definitely not quite correct. No one knows exactly what these missiles do when faced with ECM (well, we know what some R-27's do, but not AIM-120 or R-77), and it does not require going passive. There are other tricks they can use. In game, they go passive and pure pursuit until burn-through.

 

The simulation physics of missiles will be changed later in DCS.

 

Also one question for the ED Team you guys model the missiles mathematically or with IF(programing) or you do both method??? (both method in the same tread) like wen the missile change the seeker method

 

For example if you fire a R-77 in short distance it will launch in active mode, but if jammed by the target it will change for passive mode, you also take in count the math's equations for example the turns ratio or the density of the air flow.

is for other examples part of the thesis.

[Shinigami]

Missiles have very simple modeling and it isn't very realistic. It is good enough to give you some reasonable idea of BVR as long as you understand that you cannot use some tactics with them due to modeling limitations of the flight model.

 

So IF programing for the missiles for now.

 

There are other, separate issues with the seeker, and this 'switching to passive mode' thing is definitely not quite correct. No one knows exactly what these missiles do when faced with ECM (well, we know what some R-27's do, but not AIM-120 or R-77), and it does not require going passive. There are other tricks they can use. In game, they go passive and pure pursuit until burn-through.

 

The simulation physics of missiles will be changed later in DCS.

 

I just use a hypothetic example but thanks, yes they use various method for anti ECM but you understand my question.

 

I'm guessing that in a real contract you include of course the physic simulation beside IF programing or whatever other method you guys use for the less call it missile AI.

[GGTharos]

I don't know what you mean by IF simulation ... ED does not do missile simulation for contracted militaries. It is too classified; such simulation is not needed at the level of desktop simulation.

I think the lowest level is the full motion simulators and those are typically made by the companies who sell the aircraft AFAIK.

 

No matter how good the missile simulation is on your desktop product - even if using physics beyond what has been used in typical theses and books written on the subject, you're just not simulating the real thing. You could probably get pretty close for a large number of heat-seeking missiles and terminal stages of most missiles, but new missiles like AMRAAM for example have slightly more complex autopilots capable of sensing the type of maneuvers you are flying and applying the best flight path counter them.

 

You can't simulate anything but the simplest missiles with just physics.

Edited April 13, 2011 by GGTharos

[Sov13t]

Even simple simulation at the level of FC2 is enough to train the fundamentals, and understanding of dos and donts.

[Shinigami]

I don't know what you mean by IF simulation ... ED does not do missile simulation for contracted militaries. It is too classified; such simulation is not needed at the level of desktop simulation.

I think the lowest level is the full motion simulators and those are typically made by the companies who sell the aircraft AFAIK.

 

I was talking of IF programing something like if the missile is at lest say 20m to the target do this else do other thing.

 

No matter how good the missile simulation is on your desktop product - even if using physics beyond what has been used in typical theses and books written on the subject, you're just not simulating the real thing. You could probably get pretty close for a large number of heat-seeking missiles and terminal stages of most missiles, but new missiles like AMRAAM for example have slightly more complex autopilots capable of sensing the type of maneuvers you are flying and applying the best flight path counter them.

 

You can't simulate anything but the simplest missiles with just physics.

 

Is a platform (not a desktop product) for missile simulation is not intended for a one in specific, but to all you just have to give the program real data of the missile like autopilot capabilities, seeker range, physic properties, AI programing, etc. Is like how to say it a framework for simulating according to the info of the missile you have, if you put all the data the program can simulate very accurately the missile, of course while more data you use more complex becomes the simulation, therefore it is necessary bigger processing power.

 

Also if you use this framework with a visualization engine you can view what the missile will do.

[Shinigami]

Even simple simulation at the level of FC2 is enough to train the fundamentals, and understanding of dos and donts.

 

Of course, but what are to talking about???

[GGTharos]

Some of the fundamentals. The lack of certain kinematics takes the speed/altitude points away.

 

Even simple simulation at the level of FC2 is enough to train the fundamentals, and understanding of dos and donts.

[GGTharos]

I was talking of IF programing something like if the missile is at lest say 20m to the target do this else do other thing.

 

It is called conditional programming.

 

No, unless you mean the fuze (If target inside fuze radius, then explode).

Also the rocket (If rocket timed out, stop thrust. If max speed reached, stop accelerating. Etc).

 

The navgation is proportional.

 

 

Is a platform (not a desktop product) for missile simulation is not intended for a one in specific, but to all you just have to give the program real data of the missile like autopilot capabilities, seeker range, physic properties, AI programing, etc. Is like how to say it a framework for simulating according to the info of the missile you have, if you put all the data the program can simulate very accurately the missile, of course while more data you use more complex becomes the simulation, therefore it is necessary bigger processing power.

 

Also if you use this framework with a visualization engine you can view what the missile will do.

 

Yes, but you will never get all those parameters. They are classified. For example, you can get very accurate rocket parameters for the AIM-9, R-27 ... but not for their guidance algorithm. Sure, you can tell it's PN but you can't tell the details. You also can't tell what sort of ECCM they are using (but you can model this as a probability of rejecting flares for example) and no one will tell you what the probability of rejecting a flare is.

 

So yes, you COULD simulate a missile reasonably well in a non-ECM environment, and perhaps to some degree in an ECM environment, but you will simply not get access to all the data you need to do this.

[Shinigami]

It is called conditional programming.

 

No, unless you mean the fuze (If target inside fuze radius, then explode).

Also the rocket (If rocket timed out, stop thrust. If max speed reached, stop accelerating. Etc).

 

The navgation is proportional.

 

Yes something like that. I'm guessing is that what you use for DCS right????

 

 

 

 

Yes, but you will never get all those parameters. They are classified. For example, you can get very accurate rocket parameters for the AIM-9, R-27 ... but not for their guidance algorithm. Sure, you can tell it's PN but you can't tell the details. You also can't tell what sort of ECCM they are using (but you can model this as a probability of rejecting flares for example) and no one will tell you what the probability of rejecting a flare is.

 

So yes, you COULD simulate a missile reasonably well in a non-ECM environment, and perhaps to some degree in an ECM environment, but you will simply not get access to all the data you need to do this.

 

That's way is a framework I only give the base for the simulation and the user is the one that know all the data, I just provide the tools for the simulation.

 

Is a shame you don't understand Spanish I'm can explain better in Spanish

 

Shinigami Out..

[GGTharos]

Yes something like that. I'm guessing is that what you use for DCS right????

 

Not exactly. For some functions of the missile yes (you do not need anything more complicated) ... for aerodynamics, not so much (Factually yes, but only for rocket boosting. This will probably go away once proper aerodynamics for missiles are implemented).

 

 

That's way is a framework I only give the base for the simulation and the user is the one that know all the data, I just provide the tools for the simulation.

 

Is a shame you don't understand Spanish I'm can explain better in Spanish

 

Shinigami Out..

 

I see what you mean now. I think the military would have to provide specifications for this framework first, but it might work out. Given the classified nature of missiles, I have only seen unclassified military missile simulation manuals and they do not contain a lot of framework (usually because they are studies for a specific purpose and can thus ignore a bunch of things about the missile).

 

Probably if you wanted to simulate a missile very well, you might want to use something like Simulink. But that sort of simulation has no place in a flight sim :)

[Shinigami]

Not exactly. For some functions of the missile yes (you do not need anything more complicated) ... for aerodynamics, not so much (Factually yes, but only for rocket boosting. This will probably go away once proper aerodynamics for missiles are implemented).

 

 

 

 

I see what you mean now. I think the military would have to provide specifications for this framework first, but it might work out. Given the classified nature of missiles, I have only seen unclassified military missile simulation manuals and they do not contain a lot of framework (usually because they are studies for a specific purpose and can thus ignore a bunch of things about the missile).

 

Probably if you wanted to simulate a missile very well, you might want to use something like Simulink. But that sort of simulation has no place in a flight sim :)

 

Of course they provide all the their need referent to data to be included in the simulation.

[blue 22]

sigh it will be nice if they made a upgrade to the mig 31 its my favorite for its awesome speed!

 

endwar came out with the best concept the su-38 slamhound only if russia had the money.

[GGTharos]

:D

 

[RIPTIDE]

:D

 

 

I saw this on =SE=Vecko's Imageshack album related to the other thread. Thanks Vecko my bestest buddy. :D :D

[GGTharos]

Sorry, it doesn't hold a candle to the spam :D

[Shinigami]

:D

 

 

Nice setup with the flares I'm going to do the same with a AC-130 ajajajajajajaja :D

[Mugenjin]

Macross missile spam ;D

[Shinigami]

Macross missile spam ;D

 

WTFIT

[Pilotasso]

Macross is an anime aerospace series where missiles are fired in large clusters.

 

Youtube it.

[Shinigami]

Macross is an anime aerospace series where missiles are fired in large clusters.

 

Youtube it.

 

he was talking of the Anime series ahh....

 

YF-27 Lucifer Brera Stern Custom for the next module of DCS :D

 

Or better a Strike Freedom Gundam or Good old Saku

 

I'm a such a Mecha and Anime Fan that if DCS make one of thous I will sell my soul to the Devil :devil:

[plane00]

su 27

 

i think modern mig 35 and so on information will not be enough.

 

flight is not complicated and some times boring

but design' value of su 27 is eternal ?? ... :pilotfly:

low drag, much fuel , low velocity capacity,...

(trivia : but . i have question why aerons are placed inward of both wings?

for roll efficiency outer place will be advantageous.

maybe because of problem of structural strength??

mig 29, su 33 have outer part aerons )

[manfrez01]

Su-27:pilotfly: