that would be the 3th source claiming 50km
germany itself,
Austria
and your swiss report
but they are very unwilling to accept anything chances are high they will mark it as duplicate of another report mentioning it cant even reach 40km (and they havent done anything on that front either eccept accepting it alteast)
Correct, but until he got the time for it we have to be patained and maybe search for even more usefull sources…
By the way, further into the report we have this:
For example, the CAMM-ER guided missile meets the distance criterion, but may not have enough energy to destroy a maneuvering target towards the end of its range. The basic requirement for BODLUV 2020 MR to engage all military air targets before using its weapons is not met by CAMM-ER. The effective range is so short that the missile should actually be described as a “short-range system”.
I think this makes it pretty clear the 30km range requirement isn’t for “the target is currently at 30km’s, fire at it”, it’s “the target has to be hit when it’s 30km’s AWAY”.
This effectively means two things:
Technically the Missile doesn’t have to be Mach 3.
As Necro pointed out, it could also mean that the missile has a much longer burning sustainer motor and a better loft profile.
It might just hold a speed of Mach 1-2 a lot longer and therefore keep more energy and reach the target faster.
It would need to reach Mach 3 in the current setting of burning through the fuel at ingame times. If they prolong the burn time but lower the thrust, we could see a max speed of around 2.2M for example and still reach the time to target.
This would likely also result in more energy during it’s final stage as longer burn time means less drag, especially during climbing.
Correct, yes. But it’s more likely the missile is simply Mach 3+ (we’ve already video of it having a 12s burn time btw, although they wouldn’t be accepted considering they’re from the you know what place).
Oh so we do know the burn time? That’s interesting.
Maybe we should start focusing reports on the loft then? Because currently they don’t nearly loft high enough. The reports state that they reach 12km altitude, which they do not do ingame.
at this point if they are so agasint increasing its speed, maybe we should focus on getting its deltaV correct or higher atleast
the SLM having about as much deltaV as the strella is kind of a joke for a system suposed to hit something AT atleast 30km no?
(also how do i make “spoiler” so that the imges are not taking up so much space?)
Then
one thing i dont get is we have sources talking about certain ranges speeds and stuff why cant gaijin do some math like on other stuff we have ingame already to try and match the sources?
They hopefully are because there’s an internal report pertaining to “Time to target” and “Range”, so we need to wait and see what they do.
then i hope it happens because atm i would not even research it but i got a question can the Launcher also use SLS or just SLM if both it would be nice to have an option for it
Only SLM, the SLS uses an diffrent launcher since its much smaller
ah okay thats good to know and i forgot to ask Engine Power and Gearing correct on Dev since Gaijin does have a History with those being wrong on the FlaRadRak
Unlikely, but the dev runs a few more days + after that they could still change it
How is a powerpoint presentation from a single guy about the insensitive properties of various munitions from a non-user country a primary source?
Its not a user/factory/repair manual, its not from the OEM, its not an original handbook.
At best its an expert opinion publication, and the expert opinion is not even on the subject of the missiles maneuvrability, its an offhand comment used as filler to make the powerpoint less empty.
Not only is this not a primary source (or even a secondary source in the context it was used for), it doesnt even claim 50g to be the max, its just claims “50g turn reported”, which, sidenote, reported by who? Reported in what context? This “primary” source isnt even the source of the 50g claim, and the source itself isnt provided.
The most insulting thing is that all of the descriptors that apply to this “source” have been used to shoot down other sources used to try to buff the SLM
so you are telling me the iris-twas nerfed based on a report of a single guy written in 2008??? before the SLM was even concepualized let alone put into production??
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
do you have the full link for this? im going to make a counter report
I dont think a “counter report” can even be made. You’d have to ask @Gunjob , but im pretty sure you arent allowed to disprove/discredit a source as the sole impetus for a bug report.
Gaijins already accepted this as “primary” and they wont change their mind now, since the source says what they want it to say.
Like, I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure you cant “bug report” a bug report
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
