Ракеты в DCS

[TotenDead]

Уже давно и они все еще гов... Такое. У грим риперов есть, с месяц назад тестили

[Glimmer]

Уже давно и они все еще гов... Такое. У грим риперов есть, с месяц назад тестили

 

А что собственно их вытащит из этого состояния?) Чудо?

 

Р-27ЭР надо только пофиксить (если уже не пофиксили, тут не интересовался) помехозащищенность и будет отличная ПАРГСН ракета +/- AIM-7M, но с лучшей энергией, собственно это не исправляет ее очевидную слабость перед более современными аналогами.

 

Р-77 держится в нише ракеты ближней-средней дальности, с чем отлично справляется и сейчас и раньше. Если переработка ее изменит так, что она не будет сливать энергию на 15км и дадут лофт (ну тут я не эксперт, так что предсказывать не буду) -> это будет +/- AIM-120B, и то, AMRAAM более гибким выглядит.

Edited October 11, 2020 by Glimmer

[Flаnker]

А что собственно их вытащит из этого состояния?) Чудо?

 

Р-27ЭР надо только пофиксить (если уже не пофиксили, тут не интересовался) помехозащищенность и будет отличная ПАРГСН ракета +/- AIM-7M, но с лучшей энергией, собственно это не исправляет ее очевидную слабость перед более современными аналогами.

 

Для Р-27ЭР/Р неплохо бы реализовать спец. траектории - для противодействия ДО и т.д. (там их несколько штук если не ошибаюсь)

Edited October 12, 2020 by Flаnker

[FoxAlfa]

 

Flight and target strike of the R-27...

[BlackPixxel]

Great footage!

 

Very smooth trajectory of both missiles, they fly nicely in formation!

 

And the target they hit almost notching them.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

This year will not. There is a lot of work on the current F-16/18 projects and others.

Sorry.

And the new AA-11 Archer?

 

Can we expect it to be added with the CFD'ed R-27/77 or sooner?

 

 

 

Should be as simple as changing two lines of code should it not?

[BlackPixxel]

And the new AA-11 Archer?

Should be as simple as changing two lines of code should it not?

 

Same with correcting R-27ET safety maneuver delay. Right now it is set to 1 second, which should be changed to 0.4 seconds, as the R-27ET can only be launched from the rail launcher.

 

All that needs to be done is to change one single line of code in the config..

[Chizh]

And the new AA-11 Archer?

 

Can we expect it to be added with the CFD'ed R-27/77 or sooner?

R-73 will be add to plan after R-27/77.

 

Should be as simple as changing two lines of code should it not?

New FM is quite bigger two lines of code. )

[TotenDead]

R-73 will be add to plan after R-27/77.

 

Это РМД-2 которая?

 

 

На 1:10 - не великоваты УА и вообще такие эволюции для 120-й? У нее все же нет ОВТ

[FoxAlfa]

I have a question about 'battery life' of the missiles, are we talking about electrical or hydraulic battery life?

[Chizh]

I have a question about 'battery life' of the missiles, are we talking about electrical or hydraulic battery life?

We take into account the operating time of the electric power system, it can be either a battery or a turbine generator driven by a gas generator. The game does not simulate the missile's power system, it just sets the operating time.

 

[FoxAlfa]

We take into account the operating time of the electric power system, it can be either a battery or a turbine generator driven by a gas generator. The game does not simulate the missile's power system, it just sets the operating time.

 

Understood, thank you! I was wondering since I expected to have 'active battery life' for ARH missiles.

Reason being since the battery drain in 'active' state is much higher due to radar power use, thus missiles that are 'mad dogged' should have much smaller 'active' life then a full supported missile till active range.

[Chizh]

 

Understood, thank you! I was wondering since I expected to have 'active battery life' for ARH missiles.

Reason being since the battery drain in 'active' state is much higher due to radar power use, thus missiles that are 'mad dogged' should have much smaller 'active' life then a full supported missile till active range.

 

Not so easy. Yes, active radar uses significantly more energy than semi-active. But on the other hand, the active missile has more economical electric actuators than the hydraulic actuators of the old semi-active one. There are many other factors.

[FoxAlfa]

 

Not so easy. Yes, active radar uses significantly more energy than semi-active. But on the other hand, the active missile has more economical electric actuators than the hydraulic actuators of the old semi-active one. There are many other factors.

 

I do agree about the actuators, but that are working and steering the missile regardless if active or SARH/supported mode.

And true there are many factors, but bottom-line is same active missile will always use more power in active state thus have a shorter life if in that state.

[GGTharos]

I suspect that you are badly underestimating modern power sources. I can run a 1kw microwave for an hour on a battery that weighs in at some 10kg. That seeker only needs to be alive for a couple of minutes and it won't be consuming the enormous amount of power that the aircraft's radar does.

[FoxAlfa]

I suspect that you are badly underestimating modern power sources. I can run a 1kw microwave for an hour on a battery that weighs in at some 10kg. That seeker only needs to be alive for a couple of minutes and it won't be consuming the enormous amount of power that the aircraft's radar does.

 

I guess you didn't use batteries 20 years ago... or goggle chrome on your phone now....

no matter if something has 80 sec lifetime on standard use... it should have much less if forced to go active early and increase its power consumption... law of conservation of energy

 

[GGTharos]

Which missiles are you talking about? Even 40 years ago PSUs were pretty powerful. Everything is a compromise where weight and dimensions are of course a huge factor, and over the span of this time energy sources have become much more dense. The main problem with a maddogged missile isn't the operating time. There are probably a lot of other factors, mainly having to do with target search and possibly programmed actions to be taken based on finding a target for x amount of time, not to mention the dangers of using the missile this way.

 

If your concern is missiles seeking forever, then I would suggest that ED instead models self-destruct after all search possibilities are exhausted. I doubt a maddogged missile would need more than 10 sec operating time to find a target, given that you'd expect it to start seeking right at launch and you're pointing the missile at the target.

[FoxAlfa]

My concern is, if AMRAAM has a lifetime of 80 sec (documented as well according to ED) during standard use, if support is dropped and that missile goes 'Pitbull' early, according to law of conservation of energy its lifetime should be shortened. If you disagree please provide me a perpetuum mobile, there is good market for it.

 

This can be solved with two timers, one standard of 80 sec, and one Active time life which triggers when missile goes active.... whichever triggers first missile dies since out of power... or energy use coefficient which increases when missile is active.

 

We can also go into battery energy density which increased 10fold in last twenty or so years or how much energy actuator expend do fight the airstream at Mach 3, as much as you like... but I didn't come up 80 second lifetime on it...

[GGTharos]

So you're trying to fix incorrect mechanization with more incorrect mechanization. :)

 

A 120 wouldn't go active early to begin with, this is just a DCS thing. The AIM-54 might be different, but that command comes from the launching aircraft anyway.

 

Either way, have been trying to find specific sources on AAM power supplies or power consumption, but this is turning into an interesting research topic. The AIM-9 has electrical motive power for 60 seconds, and that PSU is independent AFAIK. I haven't been able to find anything on the 120 other than that it has four very juicy cells or something of the sort. Nor do we have a estimate for the seeker's power consumption though I sure someone could work up something reasonable.

[Chizh]

 

I do agree about the actuators, but that are working and steering the missile regardless if active or SARH/supported mode.

And true there are many factors, but bottom-line is same active missile will always use more power in active state thus have a shorter life if in that state.

It depends on the energy source. If the source is the battery, then you're right. If the source is a generator, then it will run as long as the gas generator is working, regardless of the radar mode.

 

[GGTharos]

After some research, it look like the AIM-120 uses 4 large thermal bateries. From the graphs that I have seen, these types of batteries will run for quite a while (over 1 minute) and provide approximately 1Ah/lbs @ 28V. (so about 28Wh/lbs). I don't know what the weight of those batteries is in the 120, but in my estimation we're looking at above 1kWh power production and possibly as much as 2.5kWh for over a minute.

[FoxAlfa]

After some research, it look like the AIM-120 uses 4 large thermal bateries. From the graphs that I have seen, these types of batteries will run for quite a while (over 1 minute) and provide approximately 1Ah/lbs @ 28V. (so about 28Wh/lbs). I don't know what the weight of those batteries is in the 120, but in my estimation we're looking at above 1kWh power production and possibly as much as 2.5kWh for over a minute.

 

Correct, as far I my information goes. Marked on the diagram.

 

I do agree they shouldn't on going active too early.

Also, I do have some concerns about the power and reliability of five 5 in antenna to pick up at 8nm and track a fighter in the weeds especially unsupported, since now it is 100%.... high flying bomber, sure, but fighter in lookdown, not so sure.

 

[GGTharos]

I somewhat agree but I think that now you're talking about general radar problems which are not represented at all in the game and are not AMRAAM-specific. In addition other missiles don't use MPRF, which helps with clutter rejection. AIM-120 HRPF search and homing can begin as far as 13nm IRL so 8nm shouldn't be that big of a problem.

 

[dundun92]

Just as a side note, the source (at least one) for the 80 sec IIRC is the F-16 -34, which states that after 80 sec the datalink is terminated due to TOF constraints or something like that.

[GGTharos]

On the eagle it's 90 sec.