How have previous attempts to increase the range gone? I was comparing the aim-65D range chart against those in the F16’s NNWD manual and they fall short considerably. At M0.9 and 10kft, the max horizontal range should be 58k ft ( 17.6km and 58.8k ft slant). In game after 75s of flight the missile fell short by 2km and a final velocity of 246knots(M0.37).
On the AV8B manual the 65E/F charts are given with more info, at the same conditions you should get 69.8 kft (21.3km) max range, ~69s flight time and the impact(terminal) velocity should be ~650fps(385kt, M0.58). Surprising considering that its heavier than the D model(due a higher ballistic coef thing maybe?). Ingame I’m not sure how it performs though it has less ΔV than the D model by ~27.6%
I know these have been reported for what I remember but dunno what material they used, like magazines that got them denied or just those charts without details
Eh, the brochure is just a brochure imo. The WESEP is alright but its missing data such as launch parameters and the other info. The acceleration is ok according to the ingame delta V. And the time of flight is too short to make any generalizations when they can go for 80s of flight time.
With range charts, terminal velocity charts, dive angle at impact, loft parameters, time of flight charts all for M0.3, M0.5, M0.9 and M1.2 launches maybe they can really verify stuff. I really want to launch them at 27km.
Also penetration depth against 250 BHN armor exists which depends on impact velocity
I mean, launch parameters are given. Though I can’t remember if it was said if it was level flight launch or not, etc. In the end the data does roughly align with the charts IIRC. Most importantly however, I believe this is also the only real documented launch of a Maverick which includes flight time. Charts are nice, but real launches have the priority I imagine. Anyways, you’re right that it’s sadly only a very short launch range and only one, so it’s at most supportive evidence.
Also acceleration =/= delta V, so you can’t compare those, one is in m/s/s and the other in m/s. Acceleration at launch for 65D and G in game respectively are ~20G and ~15G, but it doesn’t actually matter. I did not account for real life thrust curves, which in this case have a peak in thrust before settling, which explained the acceleration discrepancy.
Talking about thrust, I reported that too: https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/wXgP5PVOx1Df
seems that the Maverick engine, at least the smokeless one that are on the 65D+, lack about ~15% total impulse, which is fairly significant. Probably the earlier 65A/B are similar, but I can not say for certain.
Anyways, playing around with custom missiles and the new thrust values to try to match the charts on AV-8B manual, to match the lowest altitude launches on the chart, I had to significantly decrease drag but also decrease lift in order to not make it go too far. I got to CxK of 0.98 (down from 1.525) and wingAreaMult of 1.25 (down from 1.515). This came like within ±5% of the chart IIRC, but I didn’t touch the loft, which changes things completely again.
Just altitude AGL but not launching speed which would change the flight time. Especially when we would extrapolate these values
You can work on the 65F with its time of flight charts and terminal velocity and then adjust the warhead weight to get the D. The deacceleration on the D will be higher due to the lower weight.
I’d take their difference on the ballistic coef as mentioned above. The G charts are also similar to the Fs
The thrust values mentioned on the f16’s NNWD manual are the same ones for the aim 65D/A/B ingame.
Drag should be decreased imo, and maybe the penetration on the F as it currently shows 122mm while the av8B manual values ranges from 85% of its values at 183 m/s impact speed to 162% its value at 365m/s. And the median at 274 m/s is still 25% higher than ingame. But dunno if the value shown ingame is the real one. As the D pen values are much higher.
For ‘Hammer 22’, they provide altitude, ranges and launch speed. Only for this one is 7.3s flight time mentioned too. It technically overflew the target at 7.3s, idk by how much.
Spoiler
That document, or the F-15E weapon’s delivery manual (has same information) only says ‘approximately’, the source I used in the linked report (idk if visible to others, may be hidden) has the actual values more precisely. Overall the rounding errors cause a 15% less total impulse. But this is in regard specifically to TX-633. This is further reflected in the fairly poor specific impulse of the Maverick’s engine in-game, which should be around 210s instead according to the same source. Anyways it helps partially explain the lack of performance of the Maverick, so I’m inclined to believe it more than approximate, and likely nicely rounded, values.
WT uses the impact fuse only however, so using the 1.4 ms fuse setting, you get something closer to 122mm if you could estimate the median curve. The AGM-65D uses a shaped charge warhead rather than a SAP-HE one, so it naturally penetrates a considerable amount more, though the value is also up for debate.
