Jump to content

Air-to-Air Missile Discussion


Shein

Recommended Posts

Firstly: Thanks to the OP for his efforts and demonstrations :thumbup:

 

 

I've read through eleven pages of this topics discussion, because I believe the OP has a point. But what I seem to have missed is a simple acknowledgement that a problem exists.

 

Its somewhat difficult to deny the existence of an issue, (however major or minor) based on the tracks\acmi recordings.

 

So, I'm curious .... Has this discovery been acknowledged as a problem\Bug by the Devs and will it be addressed in the near future?

 

Regards

 

 

I ran a few automated missions with a single excellent F-15C (Guns only) versus two excellent SU-27's maxed with R-27ER missiles and here's a screenshot and the result. Similar results were achieved running the mission three times.

 

F-15Cgunsonlyvs2xSU-27withmissles_zps3e1cb013.jpg

F-15C guns only vs 2xSU-27 with missles.trk


Edited by arraamis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In air, object with more inertia keeps their velocity better, which is why Train is much harder to stop than a light weight car even if it has more drag... even a large SUV which has lot more drag than sports car, is again much harder to stop.

This is fundamentally wrong. You can't ignore drag.

 

The ballistic coefficient is what you need to look at.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_coefficient

 

Sports cars and SUV's are very different unless they're airborn Sports Cars or SUV's, or at the very least at near max speed without brakes. If they aren't drag isn't the major force acting on them.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's superior if you shot them side by side, for some amount of time. But it's also more draggy, so it's going to be faster right off the rail (big booster rocket, after all), then cruise and accelerate some more, than it'll slowing faster than a 120. The 120 won't end up as far/fast at rocket burnout, but it should in theory coast longer. If the range is long enough for the 120 to loft, then it will out-perform the 27ER. And you should know this. If you know this, and can't confirm/deny, why did you start the conversation? :)

 

I know the 120A will out-perform the 27ER in max range at 6000m.

 

 

 

I haven't seen any evidence of either thing. Aerodynamics are about the same when you look at contemporary aircraft design, and they're just catching up to F-119 technology. That's just what it looks like to me.

 

 

 

Yes. But no one who knows anything is arguing this. Otherwise we'd be all like 'Well they didn't hit anything in the E-E conflict'.

 

 

 

That is correct, but we also need some RL baselines if we're talking about RL simulation. For the moment, this is about kinematics. We can't really do anything with guidance.

 

We did some computations at my work recently, because we needed to figure out a way to properly simulate R-27ER vs AMRAAM C scenario (I am talking about a military grade simulation now) and how to counter the ER. The launching platforms had the same airspeed and altitude, flying in perfect nose-on aspect. The result was that since ER goes straight at the target instead of lofting, along with stronger boost and lower Lift-to-Drag ratio at hypersonic speed, it will have the same kinematic range against a non-maneuvering target as AMRAAM C, but will reach it sooner. AMRAAM appeared to be less draggy in terminal phase along with better momentum, which meant better maneuvering capability. Our data were based on public information. The seeker performance was not taken into account, but I assume AMRAAM to be fairly superior in the end game (we have just compared the kinematic abilities of the missiles, not the fuse, seeker and launching platform radar capabilities. I used a simplified description in order to make my reply shorter, thus I am aware of some missing info. Anyway, if ED can make a true AFM for missiles in the future, the final result of the same test should be very close to our study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion this new Missile AFM is a fake and is a tool to manipulate the Domination of who they want to win. A lot of People here are not idiot and everybody can see what happen.

 

I will not say again which Missile and what is wrong, cuz some pro F-15 come and say the R-27 is the best and all Missiles are bad, but... why not watch the results...???

 

The R-77 is other fake. Most of time this Missile even is a miss at 10km.

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion this new Missile AFM is a fake and is a tool to manipulate the Domination of who they want to win. A lot of People here are not idiot and everybody can see what happen.

 

I will not say again which Missile and what is wrong, cuz some pro F-15 come and say the R-27 is the best and all Missiles are bad, but... why not watch the results...???

 

The R-77 is other fake. Most of time this Missile even is a miss at 10km.

I highly doubt that a game studio located in Moscow and crewed by what i must assume to be mostly Russians is biased against their own country's aircraft and armaments if anything it should be the opposite so can you stop with these shitty conspiracy theory arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion this new Missile AFM is a fake and is a tool to manipulate the Domination of who they want to win. A lot of People here are not idiot and everybody can see what happen.

 

I will not say again which Missile and what is wrong, cuz some pro F-15 come and say the R-27 is the best and all Missiles are bad, but... why not watch the results...???

 

The R-77 is other fake. Most of time this Missile even is a miss at 10km.

 

Off course...

36275457(1).jpg.b9902f2a0a1456a8e4ae44477adb56d1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly: Thanks to the OP for his efforts and demonstrations :thumbup:

 

 

I've read through eleven pages of this topics discussion, because I believe the OP has a point. But what I seem to have missed is a simple acknowledgement that a problem exists.

 

Its somewhat difficult to deny the existence of an issue, (however major or minor) based on the tracks\acmi recordings.

 

So, I'm curious .... Has this discovery been acknowledged as a problem\Bug by the Devs and will it be addressed in the near future?

 

Regards

 

 

I ran a few automated missions with a single excellent F-15C (Guns only) versus two excellent SU-27's maxed with R-27ER missiles and here's a screenshot and the result. Similar results were achieved running the mission three times.

 

F-15Cgunsonlyvs2xSU-27withmissles_zps3e1cb013.jpg

 

It seems pretty clear that most of this has to do with AI and the AI only. If you bring chaff into play we might see weird stuff even in an MP scenario but none of the tests involved in this thread used chaff so if we want to do that we might aswell start a new discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion this new Missile AFM is a fake and is a tool to manipulate the Domination of who they want to win. A lot of People here are not idiot and everybody can see what happen.

 

I will not say again which Missile and what is wrong, cuz some pro F-15 come and say the R-27 is the best and all Missiles are bad, but... why not watch the results...???

 

The R-77 is other fake. Most of time this Missile even is a miss at 10km.

Your posts in this thread aren't really constructive though, are they? 120C can be junked at 10k aswell..

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm quite sure Falcon or anyone else wouldn't have survived that if those 27's were not AI...

ER's and other missiles do need a revision, but in this case, most of the blame in on broken AI.

 

It seems pretty clear that most of this has to do with AI and the AI only. ...

 

Are you sure?

 

See the miracle!!!

6.png

 

This time your BROKEN AI without chaffs vs 15 AI Su27 + 1 SU27 CLIENT. I'm sure he would survive and the second wave if only not lost speed.

FC3 R-27ER test2 CLIENT.rar

Quote

Немој ништа силом, узми већи чекић!

MSI Tomahawk MAX | Ryzen 7 3700x | 32GB DDR4 3200MHz | RX 5700 XT OC Red Dragon 8GB | VPC Throttle CM3 + VPC Constellation ALPHA on VPC WarBRD Base | HP Reverb G2

 Youtube Follow Me on TWITCH! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure?

 

See the miracle!!!

6.png

 

This time your BROKEN AI without chaffs vs 15 AI Su27 + 1 SU27 CLIENT. I'm sure he would survive and the second wave if only not lost speed.

 

If you look closely you can see he pretty much did the perfect notch to you, that's why your first ER missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is fundamentally wrong. You can't ignore drag.

 

I am not ignoring drag, never said anything like that

 

Please stop saying inertia when you mean momentum.

 

They are the same thing, you can refer to momentum when object has some velocity, while inertia can be used regardless of objects velocity.

 

Now, this is why I think my physics tells me R-27ER should out-range the AIM-120C (slightly)

 

R-27ER

mass 350Kg

dia 265mm

fuel mass 140Kg

missile mass when fuel has burned out 210Kg

 

 

AIM-120C

mass 152Kg

dia 178mm

fuel mass 51Kg

missile mass when fuel has burned out 101Kg

 

Taking for both missiles/bodies approximately same drag coefficient for missile head shape, same velocity once fuel burned out, same altitude, air density etc

 

What works in AIM-120V favor:

smaller diameter

 

What works in R-27ER favor:

more mass

 

AIM-120C frontal surface area is around 0.025m²

R-27ER frontal surface area is around 0.056m²

 

so ratio of surface area in AIM-120C favor is 2.24

This lesser surface area will induce less drag force by that factor (I am neglecting aerodynamic difference, where surely there are some but not that much)

 

The mass works in R-27ER favor as creates more inertia (force opposing drag) by factor of 2.079

 

If drag coefficient is 1 for both missile shapes then AIM-120C would decelerate slower, because drag coeff of 1 makes less drag force vs more inertia force higher (I'm not sure if I word this properly), but if for example drag coefficient is less than 1 (say 0.8 ) then you need to reduce the ratio of 2.24 in favour of AIM-120C to 0.8% which is 1.792

 

so

 

it comes down to Force due to Inertia vs Force due to Drag (here mass, and drag play only role as everything else is constant, in same firing conditions)

 

More mass says Inertia will want the missile to keep its velocity better, while less drag wants also the missile to keep its velocity better, but as mass ratio working in R-27ER favor is higher than less drag ratio working in AIM-120C favor, with drag coefficient less than 0.9 for each, the R-27ER should decelerate closer, hence have more range.


Edited by Kuky

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look closely you can see he pretty much did the perfect notch to you' date=' that's why your first ER missed.[/quote']

 

What about the other 15 Su27? I could be in place of any of these AI.

 

When are you planning to become objective and see things from all angles, please?

Quote

Немој ништа силом, узми већи чекић!

MSI Tomahawk MAX | Ryzen 7 3700x | 32GB DDR4 3200MHz | RX 5700 XT OC Red Dragon 8GB | VPC Throttle CM3 + VPC Constellation ALPHA on VPC WarBRD Base | HP Reverb G2

 Youtube Follow Me on TWITCH! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also whats with the lag spike at 0:23

 

but the AI is shooting all their missiles at a 15+ degree incline, the missiles wouldnt have hit at that angle, even if a player was shooting them.


Edited by karambiatos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This started out as a simple disscusion.... and it is now FLAME WAR!!! Again may i add.

 

So we had this over and over again and it always ends in the same way.

 

Is there space for impovments? Yes.

Is it going to be reallistic? Nope. (Military secrets are what they are... hard to come by)

 

Im sure with the intruduction of the comming models the ordanace in DCS will have a major overhaul. With the Mig21 and the Eurofighter im confident that incoporating those weapons that they carry ED has to have a good look on all wepons.

 

Let me remind all of you that we were bitching about server crashes and CDs. Have they fixed it? Yep...they did. Only once in a while we get a CD but the servers are holding.

So if you are new to the game get used to it... its always gonna be like this unless some big game publisher buys them out. And then we are in deep crap.

 

But as far the missiles go... I remember that the C was too deadly...and it got dumbed down according to the community. Maybe...im always on the receving end of it.

So if thats the case Im sure that both family of missiles R27s and R77s can be improved. Since we wont get our hands on the real data for the present missiles in a way its make belife. Yes i like to have the real data and fly with that.... but i wont... and you neither.

 

So wait and be patient. Good things are comming but it may come in a bad packaging.

 

I would still support some sort of donation scheme to give a tenner once a month away... yes i know buy the products...been there done that!

I would speculate that once the MP is rock solid with datalinks atc overhaul(what happend to that) and the implemention of a dynamic campaign pilots will see the lure in the MP enviroment. And then and only then we will see the major improvments. Even missiles!

 

Dont take it too serious enjoy the game... it will only get better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not ignoring drag, never said anything like that

 

In space no matter the mass of an object, they all keep their velocity the same. In air, object with more inertia keeps their velocity better, which is why Train is much harder to stop than a light weight car even if it has more drag... even a large SUV which has lot more drag than sports car, is again much harder to stop.

 

Inertia = tendency of a body to keep its velocity and direction

Alright, I guess I misinterpreted that then. I thought you were saying the heavier object would always have lower acceleration due to drag.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now, this is why I think my physics tells me R-27ER should out-range the AIM-120C (slightly)

 

R-27ER

mass 350Kg

dia 265mm

fuel mass 140Kg

missile mass when fuel has burned out 210Kg

 

 

AIM-120C

mass 152Kg

dia 178mm

fuel mass 51Kg

missile mass when fuel has burned out 101Kg

 

Taking for both missiles/bodies approximately same drag coefficient for missile head shape, same velocity once fuel burned out, same altitude, air density etc

 

What works in AIM-120V favor:

smaller diameter

 

What works in R-27ER favor:

more mass

 

AIM-120C frontal surface area is around 0.025m²

R-27ER frontal surface area is around 0.056m²

 

so ratio of surface area in AIM-120C favor is 2.24

This lesser surface area will induce less drag force by that factor (I am neglecting aerodynamic difference, where surely there are some but not that much)

 

The mass works in R-27ER favor as creates more inertia (force opposing drag) by factor of 2.079

 

If drag coefficient is 1 for both missile shapes then AIM-120C would decelerate slower, because drag coeff of 1 makes less drag force vs more inertia force higher (I'm not sure if I word this properly), but if for example drag coefficient is less than 1 (say 0.8 ) then you need to reduce the ratio of 2.24 in favour of AIM-120C to 0.8% which is 1.792

 

so

 

it comes down to Force due to Inertia vs Force due to Drag (here mass, and drag play only role as everything else is constant, in same firing conditions)

 

More mass says Inertia will want the missile to keep its velocity better, while less drag wants also the missile to keep its velocity better, but as mass ratio working in R-27ER favor is higher than less drag ratio working in AIM-120C favor, with drag coefficient less than 0.9 for each, the R-27ER should decelerate closer, hence have more range.

 

Use the Ballistic ceoff

 

AMRAAM

 

101/(.025*CD) = 4040/CD

 

R-27

 

210/(.056*CD) = 3750/CD

 

The AMRAAM slows down less.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the other 15 Su27? I could be in place of any of these AI.

 

When are you planning to become objective and see things from all angles, please?

 

Dear god you have no idea about what's going on at all. We showed you that the AI will miss no matter what under those conditions. The reason you missed is because you shot FIRST and the AI defended your shot FIRST, that miss was a legit execution of a really good notch.

 

Let the AI fire first then fire yourself, unless he randomly happens to notch which is unlikely in that case you'll hit him no problem.

 

I'm the one who is completely objective, you're just all stuck with the idea that ERs are totally useless and you're stuck there DEEP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion this new Missile AFM is a fake and is a tool to manipulate the Domination of who they want to win. A lot of People here are not idiot and everybody can see what happen.

 

I will not say again which Missile and what is wrong, cuz some pro F-15 come and say the R-27 is the best and all Missiles are bad, but... why not watch the results...???

 

The R-77 is other fake. Most of time this Missile even is a miss at 10km.

 

Your posts in this thread aren't really constructive though, are they? 120C can be junked at 10k aswell..

 

 

 

 

Whats is the constructive answer for you? Enjoying killing us with the Aim-120 and turn back so fresh? We wait for a comprehensive calculation of all physical parameter of a heavy Air-Air Missile like the R-27ER. This Missile have more range, thats sure.

 

If the F-15 guys like use the Technology of an active head seeker, I am glad about that, but we would like see the comprehensive capability of the R-27ER.

 

The Aim-120C have not the mass, weigh, fuel capacity and rocket to compete in range and speed with the R-27ER. Simple like that...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats is the constructive answer for you? Enjoying killing us with the Aim-120 and turn back so fresh? We wait for a comprehensive calculation of all physical parameter of a heavy Air-Air Missile like the R-27ER. This Missile have more range, thats sure.

 

If the F-15 guys like use the Technology of an active head seeker, I am glad about that, but we would like see the comprehensive capability of the R-27ER.

 

The Aim-120C have not the mass, weigh, fuel capacity and rocket to compete in range and speed with the R-27ER. Simple like that...

 

Well based on Kuky's data is has a better Ballistic coeff, so it's going to out range the ER for the same flight conditions if neither is tracking a target.

 

While you want to see a capable R-27, some people want capable missiles of all types. Crazy ideas like ED bias toward a certain missile are pointless without shed loads of evidence to back them up. Like I said before, the R-27 is the best performing missile we have as of 1.2.7.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1992715&postcount=1138

 

How can ED be biased by making the missile they hate, the best?

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it comes down to Force due to Inertia vs Force due to Drag (here mass, and drag play only role as everything else is constant, in same firing conditions)

 

More mass says Inertia will want the missile to keep its velocity better, while less drag wants also the missile to keep its velocity better, but as mass ratio working in R-27ER favor is higher than less drag ratio working in AIM-120C favor, with drag coefficient less than 0.9 for each, the R-27ER should decelerate closer, hence have more range.

 

Kuky, this method is incorrect. You must get the Cd curve both missiles in order to compare them because the Cd will not be the same across the range of speed the missile flies. Further, the Cd (and I will say again, Zero Lift) is going to be lower for AMRAAM.

 

In case you're wondering, there is a bit of RL data as well as CFD work being done to figure out the exact details.

 

Use the Ballistic ceoff

 

Interesting. I've seen BC used for guns mostly ...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 120 has a better BC even if they have the same Cd. The 120 has a lower Cd than than ER. The ER will slow down faster.

 

I'm interested to know where kirky got the surface area data from. I don't dispute it, merely curious.

 

Edit: I get it, just using the diameter of the missile, okay. Fair enough.


Edited by IASGATG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weapon AFM is very good IMHO, in terms of physics for a non-maneuvering missile. The only thing missing right now is the change in drag caused by the rocket motor being on or off. I really have no idea what the physics of a maneuvering missile work like, so I don't know about efficiencies in turning etc.

 

It's all a matter of getting the right Cd curves now.

 

There's already a Cd curve plotted for AIM-120 from RL test data and CFD, so the CFD results are basically verified. At some point I hope the team that did the 120 CFD will do the R-27 as well, then we'll have a better picture of how they act ... I always suspected it will be very similar to what you're saying, at least for AIM-120A/B, but like I said ... we already have a 120A benchmark that says it will out-range the 27ER at 6000m due to lofting, and significantly so - in other words, the 120 platform gets first shot. That is based on the official 27ER DLZs, and in game the loft function is very bad at keeping speed so ... we will see. In the end the game should give you a pretty good idea of relative performance.

 

We did some computations at my work recently, because we needed to figure out a way to properly simulate R-27ER vs AMRAAM C scenario (I am talking about a military grade simulation now) and how to counter the ER. The launching platforms had the same airspeed and altitude, flying in perfect nose-on aspect. The result was that since ER goes straight at the target instead of lofting, along with stronger boost and lower Lift-to-Drag ratio at hypersonic speed, it will have the same kinematic range against a non-maneuvering target as AMRAAM C, but will reach it sooner. AMRAAM appeared to be less draggy in terminal phase along with better momentum, which meant better maneuvering capability. Our data were based on public information. The seeker performance was not taken into account, but I assume AMRAAM to be fairly superior in the end game (we have just compared the kinematic abilities of the missiles, not the fuse, seeker and launching platform radar capabilities. I used a simplified description in order to make my reply shorter, thus I am aware of some missing info. Anyway, if ED can make a true AFM for missiles in the future, the final result of the same test should be very close to our study.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the caff rejection, going to be updated, all SARHs are showing amazingly bad performance once chaff is introduced, ARHs dont fair much better either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...