1.11 Patch - BVR Improvments

[169th_Crusty]

i often do that as well on a saturday night, i r go out C*****G :D :icon_wink

 

LOL, ...maintaining wing area to range ratio, of course! (I don`t know what that means... :) )

[Prophet_169th]

No its not, much the opposite. the more mass the more it will glide, ever heard of inertia? The less mass the faster drag slows it down.

 

Yeah I am aware of inertia. And if you were aware of it, you would also know that the more inertia, the harder it is for the object to change directions. Which is acceleration.

 

And you even state what I meant. The less mass, the faster drag slows it down. You would want to do this in final phase, so it is easier to steer.

[GGTharos]

You're both wrong. It's a compromise, a fine balance when your weapon is unpowered.

 

It'll work just fine at high speeds, it's meant to ... low speeds, things start getting iffy.

[S77th-GOYA]

Pilotasso, I think you mean momentum, not inertia.

 

Carry on, gentlemen.

[Prophet_169th]

Pilotasso, I think you mean momentum, not inertia.

 

Carry on, gentlemen.

 

 

Momentum = Mass x velocity.

 

Inertia = resistance to change in motion.

 

Momentum is a function of velocity, where inertia is a function of acceleration.

[D-Scythe]

Really nice to read your debates. Can I throw something a bit 'flammable' to your 'conversation'? ;)

I heard some opinitions from dedicated guys (engineers) and I concluded for myself that AIM-120 has two major technology advantadges over R-77: very good control system mechanics (actuators) and excellent radar head.

R-77 at other side has very powerfull engine.

Another one. There is not now R-77 model. Only limited capability RVV-AE is produced for export purposes. Russian AF never seen R-77.

 

That's all. Enjoy.

 

If you really like my debates, I'll write you a whole bunch if you release the patch before I have to go back to univeristy ;)

 

BTW, and I love "flammable" conversations! :D

[192nd_Erdem]

"OMG AIM-120 is OVERMODELLEDZOR!1111".

[Pilotasso]

Momentum = Mass x velocity.

 

Inertia = resistance to change in motion.

 

Momentum is a function of velocity, where inertia is a function of acceleration.

 

Aplying simple newtonian laws we got the balance: Drag-a*M=0

Drag=a*M adding the fact that V=vo-a*t, the smaller the M, the bigger is "a" and the smaller is "V", all this because drag is a previously determined value by aerodynamics. ;)

 

"OMG AIM-120 is OVERMODELLEDZOR!1111".

Its actualy undermodled. I have seen in military sims that it can be launched over 30 miles away provided you are over 33000 and above feet and the target is around heading to you at 20-25000 feet mach high subsonic. In lockon the max you can do is 24 miles. ED has cut its range by 5-10 miles.

 

To make things worse in LOMAC the R-77 is everything the AMRAAM is (according to what they have said so far) except it has a longer burn time set in the code. Military analysts say the 120 tracks better. No matter what you do in LOMAC the R-77 is always superior to the AMRAAM.

 

Should we have an AMRAAM proportionaly modeled in LOMAC independently from the R-77 we would have the F-15 scoring again like in 1.02 (though I know due to different reasons) i guess realism here is relative to balance.

[Prophet_169th]

Aplying simple newtonian laws we got the balance: Drag-a*M=0

Drag=a*M adding the fact that V=vo-a*t, the smaller the M, the bigger is "a" and the smaller is "V", all this because drag is a previously determined value by aerodynamics. ;)

 

Aerodynamic drag = 1/391*Cd*A*V²

 

So 0=(1/391*Cd*A*V²)-(a*M) *edit* <- Dont know what I did.

 

So given a missle. High mass is good, because the momentum will help fight the drag.

 

But when the missle needs to make large changes in direction, which is acceleration, less mass is good. Higher drag is good.

[Pilotasso]

granted that, but you referred to the end game. You bet your missile wont turn much if it occurs sooner for lighter missile. So lighting it up wont give you more manuevering, instead youll shorten its range by wich time it wont turn anyway. That was my point. :)

[GGTharos]

 

Its actualy undermodled. I have seen in military sims that it can be launched over 30 miles away provided you are over 33000 and above feet and the target is around heading to you at 20-25000 feet mach high subsonic. In lockon the max you can do is 24 miles. ED has cut its range by 5-10 miles.

 

You can kill things from 40nm away with the AMRAAM in LOMAC, even farther if you go to the right altitude. Only if the target doesn't attempt evasion though...

[Prophet_169th]

granted that, but you referred to the end game. You bet your missile wont turn much if it occurs sooner for lighter missile. So lighting it up wont give you more manuevering, instead youll shorten its range by wich time it wont turn anyway. That was my point. :)

 

Yes lightening will. Less mass, the less force needed to apply a change in direction.

 

That is why I said a jettison-able part to missle.

 

We were speaking on a what-if, super missle.

 

I was also saying that retractable fins would be good to, to decrease drag at first.

[Kenan]

Will the GCI in 1.11 now actually TALK to the pilots?

This is important especially for MIG29A pilots who dont have datalink and rely solely on audio feedback.

[192nd_Erdem]

Its actualy undermodled.

 

You took that seriously? :O

 

Oh,btw I know everything West in this game is undermodelled and anything East is overmodelled for you,isn't it? :)

[GGTharos]

Everything is over/under modelled. Give it up, have a useful discussion about it instead of throwing red herrings at people ;)

 

I believe that the reason for saying that the 120 is udnermodelled in comparison to the 77 was VERY CLEAR in this thread.

 

Regardless, it isn't a big deal for anyone here I think.

[D-Scythe]

Everything is over/under modelled. Give it up, have a useful discussion about it instead of throwing red herrings at people ;)

 

I believe that the reason for saying that the 120 is udnermodelled in comparison to the 77 was VERY CLEAR in this thread.

 

Regardless, it isn't a big deal for anyone here I think.

 

Haha, well, if the AIM-120C does have a better seeker or whatever, I'd like to see that modelled. I mean, the R-77 already has the longer range in LOMAC...:D

 

But to be fair, ED did listen to some of our wishes and the R-77 actually does have slightly more drag than the AIM-120 in the sim. It's most apparent at low altitudes where drag is emphasized.

[GGTharos]

I don't mind having the R-77 be equivalent to the 120 ... remember we're not fighting with the real RuAF, we're fighting with the RuAF that got the real, non-export version of R-77. THat works very well for me, and frankly I wouldn't want to see the other side deprived of this. This is a sim, but it's also a game and when playing online, it's a bad idea to completely bias the thing for one side or the other ... as is, both sides have challenges to deal with.

[Force_Feedback]

What about jamming? I mean ECM isn't just a turn on/turn off type of device, you have (at least on the soviet side, but probably on the US side as well) different modes in which jamming can be accomplished. The ECM system in the soviet made aircraft has a mode in which it can jam only certain types of emissions (let's say sam tracking radars).

So will the missing link between the RWR and the ECM system be fixed of soviet planes?

 

BTW, I have the russian lomac cd now (legally bought btw) It's sitting on a shelf now, for future use :)

[GGTharos]

Jammers are EXTREMELY hard to model realistically, for a few big reasons:

 

1. We know and understand a numebr of jamming methods, but

 

2. We don't know the hardware limitations for those jamming methods (this is very very bad)

 

3. We don't know what methods a specific aircraft or jammer is capable of using

 

4. Some jammers can have their antennae changed to cope with different threats, but if you model it as 'all in one' then it's more resistant to threats than it should be. Choosing your jammer setup should be important.

 

5. There are ECCM techniques which we simply don't know about

 

6. We don't know the relative effectiveness of each jammer, compared to each other and with respect to ECCM used by the attacker.

[Pilotasso]

Yes lightening will. Less mass, the less force needed to apply a change in direction.

 

That is why I said a jettison-able part to missle.

 

We were speaking on a what-if, super missle.

 

I was also saying that retractable fins would be good to, to decrease drag at first.

 

Right, dump half of the mass of the missile and then what you have is a manueverable missiled that went short of its target.

[GGTharos]

Guys, instead of arguing about it, ask SK for minizap and simulate it ;)

 

however, you will most likely find out what the missile designers have found out:

 

Sometimes, it would make sense to have a jettissonable section to lighten the missile, however, in order to maintain the 11:1 max aerodynamic efficiency ratio (length to width), and because sometimes you don't WANT to jett it either, it's much ebtter to save yourself the hassle of adding complexity to the weapon and leave it without a jettissonable section.

[Kula66]

Right, dump half of the mass of the missile and then what you have is a manueverable missiled that went short of its target.

 

Remember that there are loads of multi-stage AA weapons ... drop the booster and the rest flys to intercept!

[GGTharos]

No ... those are SAMs ... not AA missiles.

There is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference.

[Kula66]

Yes I know ... So what is the difference between a SAM and an AAM?

[GGTharos]

The SAM must climb, and it must climb a -lot-. Getting 'up there' is actually a lot of work. It starts from 0 alt, 0 speed.

 

By comparison the AAM is already at altitude and speed when launched, in some manner of speaking, and in general doesn't have to accomplish any hard climbing.

 

However if you were to use an AAM as a SAM, you could only at best use it as a relatively short range medium-altitude system.

 

On the other hand, powerful SAMs will go both far AND high.

 

Also note the lack of stages on SA-10's and Patriots ... stages add complexity and appearently aren't always necessary any longer.