ALARM has a random ass dual pulse motor will will eventually be removed when the devs get round to it.
it has triple pulse lol boost sustain boost for some reason
Considering their flight profiles and target sets, it kind of makes sense that the Kh-31’s prioritize speed at range rather than energy at target tbh.
Kh-31’s will either be fired at very large slow moving targets like ships, or mostly stationnary GBAD systems, and atleast according to the in-game models, take more a ballistic approach. By optimizing for speed at range, they limit how much time they might spend in the enemies radar search zone, and minimizes flight time, limiting the targets response time.
For meteor on the other hand, the targets are generally highly maneuverable in 3D throughout its entire flight. Optimizing for energy retention means erratic maneuvers or changes in flight path along its coasting phase are less impactful, and the missile retains its ability to be threatening in the terminal phase, minimizing time to impact from the moment the missile is actually detected from going pitbull (irl radars likely arent picking up meteor’s shot at 70km+ like they do/would in-game).
Also on the topic of ramjet cruise logic in-game, I havent looked at it much, but one feature of Ramjets is that they need to reach a certain speed range to actually use their fuel optimally (something like M3.0+), so something that might not seem logical (cruising at low M3.0 speeds instead of “conserving” their fuel) may actually just be the optimal way for them to conserve their fuel.
1 Like
true, for the kh-31pd the peak efficiency (100%) is at 20% throttle at mach 2, at mach 3 and 4 this efficiency value is lower, an important note is that across all mach ranges the peak efficiency is at 20-30% throttle.
the airflow value (local air density in kg/m³ x missile’s speed in m/s) is important for this too, if the missile is in a higher throttle setting (less efficient), it can use a more efficient multiplier from a lower throttle setting if the airflow value is high enough. the airflow value by itself doesn’t directly affect efficiency, only the maximum thrust permitted in a range from 0-100%, only when it goes above 100% is that it starts to affect the efficiency positively, the kh-31pd has the maximum at 150% when the airflow is at 600 or above.
1 Like
Tbf, that’s actually true of any engine, from cars to rockets. The goal is not to optimize for fuel/second consumed, but rather fuel/distance traveled. And since fuel consumption is non linear with speed on basically any type of engine/propulsion, you have sweet spots
linear gains all have mistakes, recalculate
aim174b from your data have 35 db gain when it should have 31
what formula do you use for attenuation change on diffirent altitude?
cope
mfs gonna notch until the end of the match.
Better be a perfect notch angle too 😂
Yeah ok, but are in the ballpark.
I don’t exactly know what’s the antenna diameter eg. and freq. are assumed as well, but is close enough to prove the point.
For 10GHz 0.01dB/km in ISA weather, in rain 2xISA and in clouds 10xISA.
For 14GHz 0.08dB/km in ISA.
Total loss is attenuation times range.
usually it is a diameter - 10-30 mm
i mean altitude range chagne by air destiny
α(h)=α(0)×e^(−h/H)
α(h) - attenuation
α(0) - attenuation SL
h - altitude
H - altitude at which attenuation drops to approximately 37% of its sea-level value in ISA.
1 Like