That is AoA and not G, just fyi.
1 Like
i use AI to translate, i also could post in german… but no one would understand it
That is fine and i actually personally encourage that one, language is what AI is actually (for the most part) good at.
But using it to gather information (other than surface level knowledge) is just bad, even summarizing documents can sometimes result in incorrect information.
It can be a good place to start looking for sources but i do encourage you to actually look at and read through those sources to see if they actually say what the AI thinks they say.
oops getting myself confused
1 Like
honestly i saved :http://www.zaretto.com/sites/zaretto.com/files/missile-aerodynamic-data/AIM120C5-Performance-Assessment-rev2.pdf as a PDF, uploaded it to chatgpd and say can you read it without issues?
Answer yes, than i go searching
and then is say, find me the parts that says: “XXXXXX”"
explain me the part.
is it possible with that informations that: XXXXX
Translate me the sh*** in english XD
That happens even to the best of people :)
Digital combat simulator means not that is the game DCS,
US-Forces and all other forces on this planet have : Digital combat simulators
Think about it
when using chatgpt or other mt tools its best to segment what you do, translating lots of little parts rather than inserting it all at once and asking it to find parts that agree with you, chatgpt finds it hard to disagree with its users so is more than happy to cherry pick for them without giving context
its a very specific grammar they use when talking about it that imply to me that they are talking about DCS
they dont say “in a digital combat simulator” or some variation they say “in Digital Combat Simulator” giving it full capitalization
I looked through the document, i can’t find any mention of G-forces in it really.
It’s also not a valid source as it is just 3 random guys trying to make the missile in the game DCS more accurate to real life by doing their own calculations and simulations.
This is also fine, but then you need to actually read the document yourself to verify that what the AI is saying is correct, often it is sadly wrong and just guessed things. If you have problems with the language then you can put the document (or the text) into translators so that you can read it in your own language. The most important part is to verify it yourself and not trust the AI answer at the end.
Yes it is, at the end of the document the authors write this (p.39):
A comparison of the calculated performance of the AMRAAM to the performance of in-game
employment of the AMRAAM shows that the missile is not properly modelled in Digital Combat
Simulator.
1 Like
they kinda talk about it once but its not like they modelled a maximum G pull of their missile, they were just doing aerodynamics tests so its just that they had it hit 30g once
Spoiler
1 Like
I think you’re misreading it, they have manually set G loads for the tests and create graphs of the AoA needed and resulting decrease in speed to be able to maintain that desired G-load.
Look to the right (p.29):
They limit the angle to 30 deg due to the flow separation that happens above that AoA.
1 Like
AMRAAM using the same propellant as Sidewinder does mean it has the same thrust as Sidewinder. Saying that two missiles have the same thrust because they use the same propellant is like saying a hatchback and an F1 car produce the same amount of horsepower because they both use petrol.
2 Likes
Yeah thats what i mean they just tested what aoa was needed to maintain 30g, i may have misread it before but i have now fully read and comprehended this extemely unuseful source
1 Like
Huh, I just noticed that the figures from this “document” are qouted on wikipedia, I should go remove those. Because yeahhh this really is not a proper source.
Update: Fixed on wikipedia
2 Likes
Thanks, I’ve read it. It summarizes that 50g is theoretically possible, but only for milliseconds to a few tenths of a second. Unless I misread something due to the translation.
and thats the problem, its all theoretically and not proved, but i think you would also agree that the aim120c would need a buff…
TBF, missiles basically never actually hit their top G load anyways in warthunder. Only missiles that reliably do are like, some early sidewinders, pheonixes, MANPADS and some other SAMs… that’s about it.
The document still gives proof (well not really proof), but evidence for a major buff of the 120c
Being able to pull 30g and sustain that for 4.5s while boosting is something that the 120c is not capable of right now (to my knowledge)
its not
like at all, you are lucky if it can pull 20Gs
1 Like