I agree that you can’t get a precise number out of it… BUT
If I tell you my car can reach a place in a hour drive from my house and then you try it and it takes twice that time even while flooring it the whole time then you see the issue, right?
There isn’t a way to get a specific speed. But you can create some loft profiles, play with the weight and thrust and adjust the numbers until they match that report roughly. They have guessed a lot more than that with other vehicles, so I don’t see the reason for not doing it here as well.
Yeah that doesn’t say much at all sadly. "Engaged at " does that mean hit at that distance? does that mean the missile was fired when the target was at that distance and the target is then moving away from/towards the launcher? at what speed is the target flying towards or away from the launcher?
If the target is flying mach 1 towards the launcher for example then it travels 20 km in those 60 seconds so the missile meets it at only 10 km away (Random numbers just to show what i mean). There isn’t enough information at all to get any speed from that statement.
but i get what you mean, its still frustrating having to argue about the speed when there are so many sources saying otherwhise, just sad for us that diehl itself doenst put it into the marketing
It doesn’t say at what distance the target was hit though. the only time distance is mentioned is “engaged at”. it doesn’t say what distance the target was hit. and i can’t personally see them stating that those are the same, it’s an assumption from the reader which sadly isn’t good enough for a source.
I would like to point out that i am personally also on the same page as you guys, i want it to be mach 3 as that is the number i see almost everywhere, but i have yet to see more than one reliable source for it that isn’t third party or, a wiki page or a random blog. I did try to find a source for it myself just a few days ago but sadly couldn’t.
Even if the missile flew Mach 2 for the entire duration of the flight and did so in a perfectly straight line the missile would barely reach it’s effective range in time.
Now the distance to the target was “more than 30km” away, if we assume it was 31km and if my napkin math is correct than reaching 12km altitude somewhere during the flight increases the distance travelled to between 37km-44km.
That means the missile flew 37-44km in 60 seconds which gives an average speed of nearly Mach 2. Not a max speed of Mach 2.
i tried that aswell (current speed to 30km ) and time to 30km from the source, its about 60% difference, if you were to aply 60% to the 710m/s currently in game, o look we get ~1100ms and 60% is kindoff an underestimate considering our target isnt moving at all while theirs is
but getting an accurate speed from this math is impossible, however 60% is not just a simple error
Okay, let’s humor that thought as I can see the truth in it.
If we assume that “jet drone” was flying at pretty much max speed of the fastest regular military drone (around Mach 0.4) it would have travelled roughly 8km during that time when flying perfectly straight at max speed. Since the target did evasive maneuvers I would assume the target didn’t fly straight all the way but let’s stick with that.
That would again mean a horizontal distance travelled of roughly 22km. Total distance between 27km and 32km.
Median speed would then be 450m/s - 533m/s on average which is still Mach 1.3 - Mach 1.55 on AVERAGE.
Currently the missile is flying at M 0.4 at 15km distance.
(EDIT: Messed up my math a bit with only 10km height this time. Should be around 1km more on the distance and a bit higher speed, not going to redo the numbers as the difference is going to be within like 5%)
Target drones are never anywhere near mach 1. You’re arguing that the missile went to 12km altitude just to hit something at 10km from the launch site.
Is there anything you won’t say to protect Russian cas dominance?
Realistically the drone was very much subsonic, launched on when it was at 30 and hit when it was at 20-25.
We have a flight time to hit a ~m0.4 target when it was at 30km. That is more than enough info to make an honest estimate, the nitpicking you’re seeing from these people is anything but honest.
That then sounds like more of an issue with to much drag and/or to little engine power than a top speed issue (for in-game purposes). That is however generally a better argument. My main issue is that it’s all still user calculations and a lot of guesswork/assumptions. Even at the lowest end of estimations those are to my knowledge not accepted at all. The source is to vague to be used, the range you could get out of it is so wide that it might as well say nothing. Even if the bottom of the range is above in game values it’s still to vague to be used. It’s like those that say “above x speed”, well how much? would x+0.00000001 be accepted by the community? likely not at all. it’s better to then have some semblance of concrete numbers (which with modern systems are… well… hard to get)
I also think it’s frankly…a kind of stupid decision to not at least listen to basic math.
If even the lowest estimate is far above ingame values then they should at least consider it.
Especially since right now, the missile is incapable of reaching 30km at all ballistically. I means what’s the point of saying you have an effective range of 40km when you can only engage targets up to 15km away?
