Ракеты в DCS

[nighthawk2174]

28 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

 

It does not.  It has about 4g of thrust at launch and stays at that thrust.  In exchange it burns for nearly half a minute instead of 10 seconds.

 

3.5/11, the 4 is a typo in the SMC as are the weights for the different thrust stages:  They are reversed.  So in case anyone wonders how 'official documents can be wrong', there you go.

yup the numbers took that into account 

 

23 minutes ago, Max1mus said:

 

According to this drawing, R-27ER should have 13km+ of flyoff at 1000m of altitude. So if drag is the same, then clearly something is horribly wrong with the rocket motor in DCS. In DCS, you get 9-10km.

 

I mean the current ISP values and ratios I mentioned seem to be fine for the ER.  Plus that chart looks like its under 10km maybe 9.5km.

[Max1mus]

The red line is not part of the document, thats the DCS missile.

 

It indicates that the DCS R-27ER should be 30-35% longer ranged in that situation.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Max1mus

[nighthawk2174]

2 minutes ago, Max1mus said:

The red line is not part of the document, thats the DCS missile.

 

It indicates that the DCS R-27ER should be 30-35% longer ranged in that situation.

 

?  If you follow how the chart works for~300m/s launch at 1km you should get about a 9-10km range.

 

[Max1mus]

1 hour ago, nighthawk2174 said:

?  If you follow how the chart works for~300m/s launch at 1km you should get about a 9-10km range.

 

Under which conditions should you get 13km then?

[dundun92]

4 minutes ago, Max1mus said:

Under which conditions should you get 13km then?

When your speed is under 200 m/s. Remember, this a flyout chart measuring the maximum distance between you and the missile. SO you flying slower actually means the missile flys further out from you, but not further out absolutely. Practically, this is listing the maximum F-Pole for a missile shot for a certain launcher speed, assuming you are flying in the same direction as the missile.

Edited April 4, 2021 by dundun92

[Hoarfrost]

14 часов назад, Chizh сказал:

Р-27ЭР давно дотягивает до номограммы.

Если она в ее пределах сейчас, то как она может стать еще хуже на 10%?

[Кош]

[Chizh]

6 hours ago, Hoarfrost said:

Если она в ее пределах сейчас, то как она может стать еще хуже на 10%?

Сейчас ракета большей частью вылетает за пределы номограммы. Но как мы выяснили, сама номограмма оставляет желать точности. Так есть серьезные косяки.

[Hoarfrost]

Если сейчас ведутся активные работы по р27эр, означает ли это что следующая на очереди р77? 

[Chizh]

20 minutes ago, Hoarfrost said:

Если сейчас ведутся активные работы по р27эр, означает ли это что следующая на очереди р77? 

Пока нет.

Мы попробовали посчитать Р-27ЭР, получили отрицательный результат, как я писал выше и оставили эти работы до лучших времен. Пока по горло работы по текущим проектам.

[Max1mus]

I must say, i am very shocked and disappointed.

This official document shows 13km of range, in a situation where the DCS missile only achieves 9.
When i messaged ED about this, i got the answer "This chart is very inaccurate and does not make any sense" and that they believe it should only have 8km.

I can not find a logical reason for this, i can not find an economical one. I have not a single clue why ED approaches it this way. Reminder: The DCS AIM-120 does not just match the official documents, it overshoots the estimates on them by 11% at 5000m, 23% at 10.000m.

In contrast to this, ED believes the R-27ER to undershoot the official estimates not by 10%, not by 20%, but by over 63%... (8km + 63% = 13km)

Lets see how the playerbase reacts to this.

(Ignore the red drawings on the picture below, they are not part of the document)

Spoiler

 

[BlackPixxel]

@Max1mus

 

This is a Normogramm.

You have to read it just as the arrows with the dotted lines indicate.

 

If you want a flyoff of 13 km, then you have to fire it from a lower speed of about 170 m/s, which is just 600 km/h.

 

Or did you fire it from 600 km/h and only achieve 9 km of flyoff?

Edited April 4, 2021 by BlackPixxel

[Hoarfrost]

2 часа назад, Chizh сказал:

Пока нет.

Мы попробовали посчитать Р-27ЭР, получили отрицательный результат, как я писал выше и оставили эти работы до лучших времен. Пока по горло работы по текущим проектам.

Я вас понимаю что проектов много, но на этот год они запланированы? Р77 как бы тоже является одной из основных красных ракет в онлайне, не хотелось бы еще год или несколько ждать изменений. Не знаю как для ЕД, но со стороны кажется приорететной задачей именно для многопользовательской игры? Сделать онлайн более интересным и привлечь больше игроков. Сейчас с исправлением ошибки ОЛС для р27эр, может какие то костыли и сопряжение с аим-120В по лофту сделать, до лучших времён?

[Кош]

[Max1mus]

1 hour ago, BlackPixxel said:

@Max1mus

 

This is a Normogramm.

You have to read it just as the arrows with the dotted lines indicate.

 

If you want a flyoff of 13 km, then you have to fire it from a lower speed of about 170 m/s, which is just 600 km/h.

 

Or did you fire it from 600 km/h and only achieve 9 km of flyoff?

 

This nomogramm doesnt work when you use 100m/s.

[GGTharos]

Why is that a surprise?  That's landing speed and for that missile it's probably below stall speed or useful g speed.   I guess you could have the value for completeness.

 

Also, which official documents have range details for the 120?  The only things I'm aware of simply say 30nm +, and the estimate graph that we all know and love was made based on assumptions that we don't know.

 

In addition, ED does their CFD with base drag off, so that's where the extra range probably comes from - but this changes nothing as based drag off would yield the same result for all missiles (slightly longer range).

Edited April 4, 2021 by GGTharos

[BlackPixxel]

27 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

In addition, ED does their CFD with base drag off, so that's where the extra range probably comes from - but this changes nothing as based drag off would yield the same result for all missiles (slightly longer range).

 

Well, not if one missile is modelled after the range charts (ER) and one is done with pure CFD and no base drag. Then the second missile has the advantage.

[GGTharos]

ED has done a preliminary CFD and the R-27 lost range, so, apples to apples.

[dundun92]

4 hours ago, Max1mus said:

match the official documents

Intel estimations arent exactly official documents in the sense needed here. This wouldnt be the first incorrect soviet intel estimation either (or intel estimations period tbh)

Edited April 5, 2021 by dundun92

[Max1mus]

8 hours ago, GGTharos said:

ED has done a preliminary CFD and the R-27 lost range, so, apples to apples.

Not surprising, when they (really just he) go into it with the perception that it should be worse (posting it on the forums long before any work started). I bet i could bias the data enough, that when i put a bunch of nonsense into the software, i get 30% or 50% less range.

Maybe DCS atmosphere is at fault, maybe something else engine related that favors non draggy, short burn missiles. But thats up to ED to fix. It took a forum user to show ED after 7 years, that they screwed up the testing on R-27R.

If something that is so obvious and easy to check (start mission, fire missile, f10 map and measure distance to missile) stays undetected (or intentionally ignored?), anything is in question.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Max1mus

[NineLine]

Nothing is being intentionally ignored, lets not let the conversation spiral into unwanted realms, we are looking and talking about it internally, thanks.

[KBAC]

3 минуты назад, NineLine сказал:

Nothing is being intentionally ignored, lets not let the conversation spiral into unwanted realms, we are looking and talking about it internally, thanks.

Дай Бог! Все мы обеспокоены положением дел.

[Chizh]

13 hours ago, nighthawk2174 said:

Есть ли планы переделать ракеты ЗРК после серии Р27?

Да, ЗУР давно в планах, но времени пока на них нет.

[Chizh]

11 hours ago, Max1mus said:

I can not find a logical reason for this, i can not find an economical one. I have not a single clue why ED approaches it this way.

I already wrote. We have reviewed these charts many times, but they differ greatly from the SUV-27 simulator. We concluded that the big inaccuracies were due to the hand drawing of these drawings. Here, in lines with a very large slope, a millimeter error on paper gives kilometers of range.

 

11 hours ago, Max1mus said:

Reminder: The DCS AIM-120 does not just match the official documents, it overshoots the estimates on them by 11% at 5000m, 23% at 10.000m.

We do not have any official documents with ranges of 120B/C.

[Chizh]

2 hours ago, Max1mus said:

Not surprising, when they (really just he) go into it with the perception that it should be worse (posting it on the forums long before any work started). I bet i could bias the data enough, that when i put a bunch of nonsense into the software, i get 30% or 50% less range.

Maybe DCS atmosphere is at fault, maybe something else engine related that favors non draggy, short burn missiles. But thats up to ED to fix. It took a forum user to show ED after 7 years, that they screwed up the testing on R-27R.

If something that is so obvious and easy to check (start mission, fire missile, f10 map and measure distance to missile) stays undetected (or intentionally ignored?), anything is in question.

 

Why don't you think that the game's R-27ER missile is already the same as it is in reality and nothing else can be press out of it?