Kinematics and maneuverability is sadly not something that can be reported with CAMM/ER, as developers say it is just as they want it do be.
I have tested it multiple times, but i was unable to make them turn 50G, devs say there is no issue.
Kinematics are also not reportable, as without sources this is considered more than fine.
Yeah unfortunately I have come across similar issue where some missiles never hit their maximum G load, and that’s not enough for developers even if you demonstrate it. I suppose one of the few ways to get CAMM fixed might be to find the battery time and hope it is less than 65 seconds.
That’s pretty absurd, should be about Mach 1 at 25km rather than Mach 0.3, since missiles just fall out of the air generally below Mach 1 and is unable to hit their targets.
Yes, it is.
And for the same of clarity, target plane did not maneuver at all, it was flying in a straight line, so when the missile is turning, it is even worse.
Im not sure here, but battery time might be corerct here. The thing that is problematic, is that the devs decided it needs to use it whole to get to its max range. So they made it lose the speed astonishingly quickly.
So i went, and decided to check it
0.8s, engine start
So what are you testing?
Not testing anything per se, just showing how terrible at holding speed this missile is.
I understand the frustration but at the same time this is all happing at altitudes way lower then 10km which is the flight altitude of the CAMM-ER. this means at these lower altitudes it has a harder time accelerating and has more friction with the air which all put togther heavilly decrease the range of the missile.
Now I am not saying that the DEVs has modeled this correctly but I feel like the best way to test this is have a target at 10km alt or something along those lines to give it a fair test.
First of all, that is a base CAMM, not CAMM-ER.
Second, where did you get data that 10km is its flight altitude?
Ah my mistake thought you were talking about the ER variant. tho they still should share the same flight altitude.
My source for the flight altitude:
That is most likely not normal, but max flight altitude. Nevertheless i will test it later.
it could be the max flight altitude, however with such classified systems this is the best I could find and knowing the DEVs they probably used that for the range implementation. Good luck with the tests tho
