Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[danilop]

Who is directly responsible for missile development (decisions regarding data on which the missile model will be based) within ED?

 

It would be great to hear straight from the horse's mouth!

[blkspade]

The current flaw in missile performance now, seems less a part of trial and error than just error. Human error. The massive change in performance suggests a digit somewhere in the code was either omitted (thrust/multiplier) or added (drag) completely by accident. I'm pretty sure there no scenario where you would be able to overtake your own normally functioning BVR missile. The fact that ARH missile on both sides are effected probably just means missile types share some common variables.

[Teknetinium]

 

You'll just have to live with what can be gained from public/semi public info that ED and people like GG have. Which i must say is plenty for a sim, especially one at FC3 fidelity. The only people who are pulling info out of thin air are those shouting about how the AMRAAM is overpowered.

 

I'll tell you this much, the AIM-120C is DCS (1.2.3 problems aside) isn't close to how capable the weapon is in reality, and nor will it ever be.

 

:)

Edited February 27, 2013 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

Chizh usually I believe, but I don't think you will hear directly from them ... they tend to communicate on the Russian forum mostly, where they fight the same fights as I do here. :P

 

Who is directly responsible for missile development (decisions regarding data on which the missile model will be based) within ED?

 

It would be great to hear straight from the horse's mouth!

[danilop]

Ahhh ok, thanks GG.

 

Russian language is not that big an obstacle to me ... I'm native Cyrillic reader/writer so I guess visiting lower part of the forum is the way to gain better understanding of what the Hell is going on with ARHs ... :D

[GGTharos]

You won't understand much of anything from there I'm afraid - as in, I don't think the content is all that different ... and it's not 'The ARHs' ... it's all missiles :D

[Speed]

I like how people assume the AIM-120 is a 100% Hit Missile... lol... and just cuz you have a lock, and fire, doesnt mean the missile will be a 100% chance hit.

 

I shot down 3 Flankers last night in a dry run at 50nm, then shot myself down (funny actually), with my last AIM-120

 

So 50 nanometers is a long-range AMRAAM shot now? Sounds about accurate. How did you shoot yourself down? Fired the missile, hit the afterburners, and rammed it from behind?

 

Personally, right now, I would consider myself lucky to hit a non-maneuvering target in a high aspect, high closure shot at 8 NM. Obviously, the range in such situations should be at least 3X that.

 

And yes, it can be a little frustrating, waiting for ED to perfect the new missile flight models. If the frustration level gets too high, try to remember that FC3 is a beta. Missiles obviously require a lot of work still. Would you rather be playing FC3 beta now, or still waiting for ED to release the final, polished FC3?

 

Like GG said, it's time to improve your WVR skills... someday, you'll have the advantage over all those pilots who weren't there for 1.2.3 ;)

Edited February 27, 2013 by Speed

[alexej21]

Today we played many hours A2A only on our server with a lot of people.

Those peope on the Blue side didn't even know that they hit us with Amraam because the inflicted damage is not so strong now and we were able to RTB with damaged plane.

 

I like 1.2.3 and the new Su27 model and Datalink and new CA function and working navigation and, and and and .......

 

Good Job Guys ! :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

[danilop]

Maybe they've tried to simulate this:

 

Rocket motor mystery continues to halt AMRAAM

 

It's cold in Caucasus region, you know :D

[blkspade]

... and it's not 'The ARHs' ... it's all missiles :D

 

Didn't you just earlier that you see a marked improvement in the IR missiles? I haven't done much of my own thorough 1.2.3 testing yet, and Tacview being broken doesn't help. In the 3-4 hours I manage to fly last night against both human and AI, I have more hits with AIM-7s. Ofcourse I'm already much closer by the time I end selecting the sparrow. I only fired 2 Aim-9s so far on a smoking(Aim-7) Ai Su-27s and both actually hit.

[Speed]

Today we played many hours A2A only on our server with a lot of people.

Those peope on the Blue side didn't even know that they hit us with Amraam because the inflicted damage is not so strong now and we were able to RTB with damaged plane.

 

I like 1.2.3 and the new Su27 model and Datalink and new CA function and working navigation and, and and and .......

 

Good Job Guys ! :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

 

It's a good time to be a Flanker pilot, that's for sure. A stunning 3D model, weaker American missiles, a 6 DOF cockpit coming soon, and rumors of some kind of Su-27 module in development. :)

[Wags]

It's a good time to be a Flanker pilot, that's for sure. A stunning 3D model, weaker American missiles, a 6 DOF cockpit coming soon, and rumors of some kind of Su-27 module in development. :)

 

Add to that working data link for Ru aircraft.

[GGTharos]

Ok, now try a guess at what this really means. (Incidentally, no, they're not simulating AIM-120D).

 

Maybe they've tried to simulate this:

 

Rocket motor mystery continues to halt AMRAAM

 

It's cold in Caucasus region, you know :D

[alexej21]

I checked those new MP mission and I found that somebody has "stolen" my concept of air coridors and points...

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=99641

 

Give me 25% of profit from FC3 and I keep my mouth shut :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

I believe that the SRMs are done - they seem to be pretty much where they ought to be. MRM all need tuning, though I believe the AIM-7 is doing relatively well ... possibly under-performing in speed a bit still, but we will see.

 

Didn't you just earlier that you see a marked improvement in the IR missiles? I haven't done much of my own thorough 1.2.3 testing yet, and Tacview being broken doesn't help. In the 3-4 hours I manage to fly last night against both human and AI, I have more hits with AIM-7s. Ofcourse I'm already much closer by the time I end selecting the sparrow. I only fired 2 Aim-9s so far on a smoking(Aim-7) Ai Su-27s and both actually hit.

[Speed]

I checked those new MP mission and I found that somebody has "stolen" my concept of air coridors and points...

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=99641

 

Give me 25% of profit from FC3 and I keep my mouth shut :music_whistling:

 

Which one? Skies over Mount Cougar? If so, I hate to break it to you, but Grimes built that back in like August or something, and even then, it was based on his "Capturing Maykop" mission for FC2/BS1. The concept of capture/control points is a very old one- probably as old as the amount of time people have been playing games. Ever play King of the Mountain as a child? That's what Grimes refers to the mission as.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Speed

[alexej21]

OK, 15% of profit, but not less...

 

and you unBan a half of our Czech community here...

 

Your are a tough trader :megalol:

[danilop]

Ok, now try a guess at what this really means. (Incidentally, no, they're not simulating AIM-120D).

 

Well, I was obviously kidding :), but i'll try to guess:

 

First, it was a long time ago when I was studying rockets, have no idea of ATK's engine propellant mix (and subsequent specific impulse and gazillion other parameters depending on the mix) and I don't know what cooling arrangement is in AMRAAM rocket motor (ablative, curtain, film ...).

 

The other huge unknown is the nature of the AMRAAM motor "failure" which is obviously classified.

 

Soooooo ... I guess that they wanted to sack ATK and find another supplier (they've just did that) ... now, that was scientific and educated guess, wasn't it? ;) :lol:

Edited February 27, 2013 by danilop

[Maior]

Yep, that guy posts a lot of hogwash (picard578), I read what he wrote and I find it amusing that he considers all the targets to have been non-maneuvering and un-aware, and of course, if a target maneuvers, AMRAAM Pk will be zero.

 

Well, of course they are. All the money the US spends on researching miniaturized tracking systems and then all the maths linking them to the missile inertial frame and trade info with the launching platform in the meantime is just there because they have to show a budget. AMRAAMs are actually filled with concrete. It's not like an AMRAAM can pull 40Gs or anything :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

Yes you were :D

 

And I wasn't clear where I was going with my question either, so here it is:

 

ATK releases very little information on the rocket motor, but from what I have been able to gather, they have been changing technologies. The propellant is probably becoming more powerful incrementally, and quite importantly the rocket seems to have a very high fuel fraction (0.85 is my guess, because unfortunately I MUST guess it based on some known performance parameters).

 

Where I'm really going with this is that these rocket motors are becoming surprisingly powerful. ASRAAM also has a very powerful rocket motor with a light casing.

 

Well, I was obviously kidding :), but i'll try to guess:

 

First, it was a long time ago while I was studying rockets, have no idea of ATK's engine propellant mix (and subsequent specific impulse and gazillion other parameters depending on the mix) and I don't know what cooling arrangement is in AMRAAM rocket motor (ablative, curtain, film ...).

 

The other huge unknown is the nature of the AMRAAM motor "failure" which is obviously classified.

 

Soooooo ... I guess that they wanted to sack ATK and find another supplier (they've just did that) ... now, that was scientific and educated guess, wasn't it? :lol:

[Loki_]

I believe that the SRMs are done - they seem to be pretty much where they ought to be. MRM all need tuning, though I believe the AIM-7 is doing relatively well ... possibly under-performing in speed a bit still, but we will see.

 

I think y'all really need to look at the deceleration phase for all missiles. The srm's feel better (i agree) because they spend more of their flight time percentage wise in burn mode. The longer a missile spends out of burn the worse it feels in the current version. All missiles even the srm's appear to struggle keeping a lead on their targets as soon as their burn phase is complete. But as long as the rockets are burning they are all doing great maitaining an impact trajectory.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Loki_

[karambiatos]

I think y'all really need to look at the deceleration phase for all missiles. The srm's feel better (i agree) because they spend more of their flight time percentage wise in burn mode. The longer a missile spends out of burn the worse it feels in the current version. All missiles even the srm's appear to struggle keeping a lead on their targets as soon as their burn phase is complete.

thats because they are in a perpetual +4G turn it seems, they loose speed like crazy and do needlessly sharp turns

[GGTharos]

Maneuvering missiles will lose speed quickly, it's just the way things are.

[Exorcet]

I think y'all really need to look at the deceleration phase for all missiles. The srm's feel better (i agree) because they spend more of their flight time percentage wise in burn mode. The longer a missile spends out of burn the worse it feels in the current version. All missiles even the srm's appear to struggle keeping a lead on their targets as soon as their burn phase is complete. But as long as the rockets are burning they are all doing great maitaining an impact trajectory.

Missiles are really low aspect ratio bodies, and most of the body is just a cylinder. They'll have lots of drag when trying to turn.

 

However I sort of agree. They might have a little bit too much drag when maneuvering. What complicates this is flight profile though. Right now active missiles basically suicide when lofting which is severly cutting range, at least against non maneuvering targets. PN causes a similar issue.

 

But that's not what I came here for. I have some potentially good news for MiG-29S pilots

 

EDIT UPDATED CHART

 

 

EDIT UPDATED CHART

 

The 120B seems to be the weak missile in 1.2.3. The R-77 is only slightly worse than the AIM-120C on a non maneuvering target.

 

L[T]_a/v/r = Launch [Target] altitude (ft)/velocity (knots)/range (nm)

 

V_mx is max velocity

V_im is impact velocity

 

Semi actives next. And the SRM's are doing well, though I have no hard data. AIM-9 outranges its seeker now.

 

EDIT

 

Added SARH's

Edited February 27, 2013 by Exorcet

[Mandrake5]

Missiles are really low aspect ratio bodies, and most of the body is just a cylinder. They'll have lots of drag when trying to turn.

 

However I sort of agree. They might have a little bit too much drag when maneuvering. What complicates this is flight profile though. Right now active missiles basically suicide when lofting which is severly cutting range, at least against non maneuvering targets. PN causes a similar issue.

 

But that's not what I came here for. I have some potentially good news for MiG-29S pilots

 

 

The 120B seems to be the weak missile in 1.2.3. The R-77 is only slightly worse than the AIM-120C on a non maneuvering target.

 

L[T]_a/v/r = Launch [Target] altitude (ft)/velocity (knots)/range (nm)

 

V_mx is max velocity

V_im is impact velocity

 

Semi actives next. And the SRM's are doing well, though I have no hard data. AIM-9 outranges its seeker now.

 

Wow nice data! From my (nicely stable :) )online session tonight I'd put current 120b max range against manoeuvring target @ approx 5nm, 120C @ 7-8nm. Haven't tried r77 yet.