Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[ralfidude]

My friend is doing some testing. So right now they are faster, but still not quite hitting Mach 4, should be 2,646 knots around, but varying on altitude, only doing 2060 knots right now. In any case, they aren't as useless as they were before.

 

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=105038

Edited May 1, 2013 by ralfidude

[dpatt711]

English Missile_data.lua

 

I want to see if I can fix missiles myself, but I can't read Russian and Google Translate hates technical terms

 

 

 

[NineLine]

I want to see if I can fix missiles myself

 

 

:noexpression:

[beczl]

I guess you can't. The missile data contain only the table data's itself. The formula is hardcoded as usually.

[Mandrake5]

So the aim-7 is just a wing ornament?

 

Ps thanks for the data

Edited May 1, 2013 by Mandrake5

[dpatt711]

The tracking and hit rate is slightly editable, it's just that missiles run out of energy and there is enough settings in that lua that you can make missiles better (I've made an Aim-7 hit a jet at 90nm), Unfortunately, I can't rad Russian so don't know what all the settings do. A guide would be nice.

Edited May 1, 2013 by dpatt711

[theChris]

Hi do you think you could include the normal r-27 missile in furthur tests (to compare with aim7m).

 

Anyway here is a little info about the missiles to help estimate where they should be kinematically.

--------------diameter(mm)--------------length(mm)-------launch weight(kg)-----source

aim-120c-----177.78---------------------3660----------------150.75-----------------fas.org

r-77 ----------200------------------------3600-----------------175--------------------enemyforces.net

r-27er--------260-------------------------4780----------------350--------------------enemyforces.net

r-27r----------230------------------------4080-----------------253--------------------enemyforces.net

aim-7m-------200------------------------3640-----------------225--------------------fas.org

[opps]

Please show not only speed but altitude . As you know, missile performance is very sensitive to altitude. Otherwise this data is useless.

[Mandrake5]

Just tested Aim-120C in 1.2.4:

 

Failed to hit a head-on non-manoeuvring target (Mig-23) @ 10nm / 7000ft, missile too low on energy to maintain intercept trajectory, went ballistic. Repeated 4x with identical results.

 

Concluding that ARH A-A missiles are still hopelessly nerfed and DCS therefore remains unplayable for F15C pilots. Only way out seems to be to restate the 1.2.2 missiles....

[IASGATG]

ED - Is there a way to mess with the drag forces/drag coefficients of the missiles?

[NineLine]

ED - Is there a way to mess with the drag forces/drag coefficients of the missiles?

 

I think its all hard coded, I know there are some numbers being thrown around, they are working on them... I know its frustrating but things are happening... the biggest challenge is getting good enough numbers without actually knowing the numbers if that makes sense :)

[GGTharos]

Drag profiles are not hard coded (the profile formula is, but you can pass it parameters).

 

If you don't understand basic rocketry, drag profiles and lift (and you don't know what drag might look like for different missiles), don't try ... unless you want to go on a learning journey, then hey, it might even be fun for you.

[Lao Fei Mao]

Just tested Aim-120C in 1.2.4:

 

Failed to hit a head-on non-manoeuvring target (Mig-23) @ 10nm / 7000ft, missile too low on energy to maintain intercept trajectory, went ballistic. Repeated 4x with identical results.

 

Concluding that ARH A-A missiles are still hopelessly nerfed and DCS therefore remains unplayable for F15C pilots. Only way out seems to be to restate the 1.2.2 missiles....

 

-------Yes, I totally agree. After updating to the latest 1.2.4, the AIM-120C becomes useless in the BVR combats, its kinectic energy seems decreasing harshly

[AFAlinebacker42]

Drag profiles are not hard coded (the profile formula is, but you can pass it parameters).

 

If you don't understand basic rocketry, drag profiles and lift (and you don't know what drag might look like for different missiles), don't try ... unless you want to go on a learning journey, then hey, it might even be fun for you.

 

Which file are the parameters in?

[NineLine]

Drag profiles are not hard coded (the profile formula is, but you can pass it parameters).

 

 

I was not aware of that, of course I dont often go looking to adjust the drag profiles of anything... my wind tunnel is broken :)

[SFAL]

I think its all hard coded, I know there are some numbers being thrown around, they are working on them... I know its frustrating but things are happening... the biggest challenge is getting good enough numbers without actually knowing the numbers if that makes sense :)

 

Sound like the hitch hikers guide to the galaxy...

The answer is 42... but whats the question....

[NineLine]

Sound like the hitch hikers guide to the galaxy...

The answer is 42... but whats the question....

 

 

That's probably a good way to sum up missile data :)

[GGTharos]

The question is 'what does maximum range mean?'

[NineLine]

The question is 'what does maximum range mean?'

 

General how soon I am gonna get blowed up when I leave the ground.

[IASGATG]

The question is 'what does maximum range mean?'

 

Yep, it's awkward to define since there are lots of different definitions for it. Moreover, we can define it as one thing, but when using someone else's data of "Maximum range" which may have a different definition, we'd encounter problems. However, I think it's prudent to define it, even if it's wrong, or inaccurate, or awkward to use. At least that way, EVERYONE knows what YOU mean when you say it.

[Exorcet]

AMRAAM is 1000000 times better than 1.2.3. AIM-7 seems weaker possibly. ER seems to be OK.

 

I haven't done my usually missile energy testing though, so I don't have hard numbers right now.

[IASGATG]

AMRAAM is 1000000 times better than 1.2.3. AIM-7 seems weaker possibly. ER seems to be OK.

 

I haven't done my usually missile energy testing though, so I don't have hard numbers right now.

 

I've done some testing on this. The problem isn't so much the Δ v the missiles generate. It's how quickly they slow down. Using simple drag force equations and manipulating the Cd from .5 all the way up to 1.0, the missiles are still decelerating anywhere between 50% and 150% too much. We're in the process of calculating an estimated Cd, but without knowing where to input it, and out of curiosity see what the current one is. We're a bit stuck on that.

[Exorcet]

I agree fully. In my opinion, the missiles are too draggy. That is the biggest problem. The second problem is guidance (admittedly ED stated this will be tackled separately). The missiles fly fairly "dumb", especially when out of fuel. However, it looked like AIM-120 (and probably R-77) loft has been slightly improved in this patch. They don't go as high, and thus don't bleed as much speed when coming out of loft.

[GGTharos]

No, it isn't useful to define it because there are too many factors.

 

Is it the maximum range at which you can still hit a target than only performs a last second jink?

Is it the maximum operating time of the battery? (it may be a factor at higher altitude but not at lower, perhaps?)

Is it the maximum range of the seeker, but not the rocket?

Is it the ballistic range?

Is it the range at which the missile slows to M1?

Is it the range at which the missile still has 5g capability left?

 

It may not be a single one of those definitions either, but many combined. And they might be different based on your bandit, too!

 

But what we do know is basic rocketry and drag models ... since we don't know what maximum range means, it's better to just match the kinetics and not worry about maximum range as much.

 

Yep, it's awkward to define since there are lots of different definitions for it. Moreover, we can define it as one thing, but when using someone else's data of "Maximum range" which may have a different definition, we'd encounter problems. However, I think it's prudent to define it, even if it's wrong, or inaccurate, or awkward to use. At least that way, EVERYONE knows what YOU mean when you say it.

[GGTharos]

It's a temporary fix and actually not correct in terms of loft logic, but it is what's there. It'll get better when guidance becomes more interesting.

 

I agree fully. In my opinion, the missiles are too draggy. That is the biggest problem. The second problem is guidance (admittedly ED stated this will be tackled separately). The missiles fly fairly "dumb", especially when out of fuel. However, it looked like AIM-120 (and probably R-77) loft has been slightly improved in this patch. They don't go as high, and thus don't bleed as much speed when coming out of loft.