The things is, without sources they might as well have just increased burn time and weight without an increase in thrust to achieve the ranges and altitudes. (It doesn’t make logical sense at all, but is still a practical possibility).
You’re just assuming the thrust and going of that. which won’t work as an argument for changes in-game, you need the sources. Which again:
60s of burn time.
Would be hilarious but now i want to see it.
What comes to my mind; what if SLM has variable thrust control irl ?
The Python-5 should at least have it iirc.
1 Like
I dont think this was ever mentioned.
How would that be achieved with solid rocket fuel?
I’m not saying it can’t, just that i can’t on the top of my head think of how that would work x)
(I think it has two stage solid fuel IIRC, a boost and a sustain, but i’m not sure)
no, because it has a solid rocket fuel motor
you can have different burn profiles, by adjusting the internal shape of the propelant
This, I Havent seen any claim of that
I think (this is just me doing logic and guessing) you could layer the fuel by first poring an outer layer of slower burning fuel and once that is set (or partially set perhaps) you could poor a second inner layer of faster burning fuel. That way you could get a booster/sustainer with solid fuel.
Maybe you should contact Diehl Defence and sell the Idea))))
dont know if that is usefull:
I googled. There is a patent of similar thought from the 1980’s lol XD
Edit:
Yep, i was correct ^^ (but this is getting off topic)
Haha, I love stuff like that. Fascinating
Gaijin has every thing they need at this point to create a more accurate representation of the SLM. We can’t meet their source requirements for many specifications but I think it is logically obvious at this point what a mostly accurate SLM representation should behave like.
If they want to “dumb down” the SLM for balancing requirements then that is fine but they should communicate that.
The right thing to do would be to make it perform realistically and then just make the missile self destruct at 18km to impose an artificial range limitation.
2 Likes
Tbf, militaries dont need to have all the hard numbers, or really any of them, publicly stated. They tend to send bids in with the relevant info and the countries will trial the systems then pick which they want.
If anything, its weird military companies put out relevant info on the system, even if its faked to some degree. Its likely more for a stock performance and/or public perception thing.
Its inconvenient for us to try to find info on something with good opsec, but its likely better for the manufacturer and countries using the system.
As for why countries like ukraine are publishing some numbers through news orgs as seen with the below sheet, thats likely due to the fact that a lot of the aid they get is dependent on public perception in the west, so they likely converse with the manufacturer about what they are allowed to publish info-wise to boost popularity/perception of the system with western audience without it being directly from the manufacturer.
Spoiler
Primary sources will be thrown in the trash after being shipped to the russian MOD anyways. Lets not pretend gaijin cares about modelling this missile accurately, they simply dont want to believe anything beyond the idea that it sucks. Its why theyre so quick to nerf it using bad sources, but refuse to buff it regardless of what info is provided.
They quite literally actively ignored the word “laser” in primary info on the seeker, multiple times, and then closed the bug report.
6 Likes
Speaking of, has anyone even tested if the missile can reach 20km altitude? Pretty sure it cant hit a stationary target 20km above it.
It can’t, I’m pretty sure some of the boys in the server tried it out, it currently stalls out at around 12 km or so. 10 km seems to be about right from their calculation.
1 Like
Oh btw, anyone enjoying the fact that when modelling the Pantsir S1, gaijin clearly went with the assumption that the 18km range stated for the 95Ya6 was its effective range, but that when modelling literally everything else, the stated range is “only for targets flying straight at you at very high speeds”?
2 Likes
It seems that if the missile is to only climb, it can reach 20km. But against any maneuvering (or rather fast moving) target, it will be much much lower. That 10km calculation is in itself a tad nonsensical, it assumes that the missile can not coast anymore beyond 15s, whilst flying at max speed for the entire boost duration? A lot of altitude can be gained still after the 15s burntime, coasting off it’s maximum speed (that ~M2.0) in low density air.
Spoiler
I don’t think it’s performing differntly from the missile on the dev at least. When I use this thing in a normal launch, it hits similar performance to seen on the dev (just shy of M2.0 at 15s, dropping to subsonic at 12-13km).
1 Like
Also for funsies, I guess, I multiplied the SLM’s booster figures by 1.5. This gives the engine a total impulse of like 220+ kN, which lines up with the one Janes source mentioned here and more in line with one estimate made here.
With that, M3.05 can be reached and 30km travel distance is reached in 64.6s, which seems quite a lot more in-line with with reality perhaps. Not the best energy still though at those ranges still tho.
Spoiler
15 Likes