Too much tin foil on my end then, didn’t see that you had the link and there was a thrust chart.
Do you know why the list the burn time as 1.88 seconds? Is it because the burn time is 1.88 seconds and the rest is the residual burn (the graph seems to fall sharply after that mark).
Yes, I believe that is why. Residual burn goes on for another 1.2 seconds or so which is a ramp-down.
@vizender makes a good case for why the Magic 2 would benefit from having booster+sustainer for better accurate modeling for example to account for missile ramp-up/ramp-down.
1.88s is derived by dividing the total impulse (area under the graph) by the average thrust.
Bruh, how did my dumb ass not notice this even though I did that calculation myself too?
I would argue the shortest burn time would be the best (strongest) for WT. The faster you get to speed, the closer you are to the target at any given moment, meaning the IRCCM is harder to defeat. Also, shorter burn means the missile diamond is out earlier, so fewer players would notice it.
The only downsides I see would be slightly reduced range and slightly higher turn radius, but this is assuming those aren’t tuned to match the charts.
Further more, I have a last proposal, using 2 linear ramp down and 1 static phases to get an almost accurate value.
To note that the IRL curve is based on the values from the document below and is a sample that is not 100% accurate but has a value that is 102% the value of the original. In my proposals, I have thus reduced the calculated thrust by removing those extra 2%. In general, it’s not completely accurate but I am certainly much closer to what is proposed by Gaijin
In general, if anyone wants to compare my values :
2 constant stages :
From 0.1s to 1.75s : 28930N
From 1.75s to 2.5s : 10888N
Total specific impulse (corrected) : 55900N (which is equal to the IRL value)
3 stage with 2 ram-downs
From 0.1s to 0.5s : y=40 000 - 29500 * X (N) with X being the time in second
From 0.5 to 1.75s : 28200N
from 1.75s to 2.5s : y=28 200 - 5155 * X (N)
Total specific impulse = 57136N (1235N above the IRL value, should be tuned down)
EDIT : I chose 1.75s instead of 1.88s as it was around the time of the second spike. This can be changed to other values if necessary
Magic 2 incorrect propellant mass
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MCpLSSBIBpPf
Yes yes I know it’s a miniscule amount, but I want to see the most funny Magic 2 possible …
Well if I’m reading this correctly does this mean the Magic II will reclaim its throne from the PL-5EII as the speedster of IRCCM missiles?
PL-5EII will still have higher delta V at the same 2s burn time due to how much lighter it is. But they will be closer than before (as at least the burn times match).
Magic 2 also seems to have a lower drag coefficient …
Edit: Correction: Though, Magic 2 has a larger diameter of 157mm compared to the 127mm diameter of PL-5EII.
Forwarded.
Appreciate it
Where 50G
It’s waiting for you to report it.
Last time 50G were evoked by devs they were like “We do not do wanting to be doing coding of dual plane maneuverability so you keep 35G and be happy”
It ends up being that the Magic 2 is apparently ever so slightly longer range this time compared to before, but yeah the turn radius will take a hit.
I never asked for a worse turn radius Magic 2, but I appreciate the somewhat increased realism. Now they just need to model a booster + sustainer model so that they can match thrust curves as well.
Hey @quartas121 ,
I rest my case:
EFT mains be doing anything but admit how obsolete their plane is.
I mean it’s not that bad, some of the tech involved is just getting old
But it’s a pretty decent aircraft
hi guys !
It’s been a while i didn’t post on this topic.
I would like to talk about the MICA EM missile.
Did someone noticed that in test mode with the rafale, the MICA doesn’t wiggle in the air and flying straight while in AB, RB, SB, the MICA is wiggling/shake in every directions ?
Doesn’t it means the issue is not the MICA itself but all the radar bands which might interfere with the missile configuration and radar ?
