So, given conditions amraam B should reach the target before than your model. ~10-20% earlier. 15% in between. You are off, a bit.
Rmax, the Rmax ingame is Raero I think. A shot at 38-40km with the same conditions should prove this. The Rmax range ingame should corresponds to the Rpi Range.
Its this “Redeye flight( F16 Ang training)”, skip to end.
Well, unlike real life my AMRAAM doesn’t determine it shouldn’t loft. I can remove the lofting feature and re-test. Presumably it would reduce time to target quite a bit if it’s not trying to maintain some elevation angle and descent on target from above.
I don’t think it would really reduce TTG, a loft is necessary. The ballistic trajectory reduces drag and its not like the missile is climbing alot. You can try
I was able to reduce time to target to <19s, it’s possible I need to adjust the burn times or thrust from the values given in the OP’ sources. I think the drag is already more or less accurate. Any lower and it will result in the missile coasting without much loss of speed even during maneuvers… extending the actual performance against maneuvering targets significantly.
Should be 17s. not 19
Also Rtr is at 7.6 Nm(14.07km) represents the maximum range shot assuming
the target performs a “Turn and Run” maneuver at launch.
Dunno, Raero shouldn’t be 36km as on DLZ
If you’re referencing the ranges in my in-game test those are completely irrelevant. I did not adjust the maximum / minimum launch range brackets… those are not synced to missile performance.
We don’t have all the variables either, and time to target for very specific shots may be inaccurate if you want to preserve the overall average performance of the missile in the game.
Can you show which timestamp the engagement is in this?
You can test them, I think they are Raero.
yeah I gave them above.
at the very very very end
Again, no. The max / min ranges being shown are a table of variables in which I did not adjust in the missile file. It’s not accurate to the actual performance of the custom missile file.
I’m not seeing in the video where all the information was extrapolated, or if it was… the conditions of the launch differ quite a bit from my own. The variables are changing too much or aren’t obvious to me.
just do a shot at 38-40km to see what it is, ezzy.
just after he locks the other F16 and range is 9.6NM. All info can be extrapolated there
Can you give a time stamp? It’s a 240p video.
It’s pointless, the graph is not connected to the performance.
9:25 I think
Well then, could you just do a shot at 39km, I’m curious.
Give me the full launch conditions so I can test the parameters. Do you want it to loft, if so how much? Because the lofting is very rudimentary in the game.
At start it says “T18”, closure rate is 518. Closure rate continues to increase to target thereafter, seems the parameters for time to target are dynamic in the video, as such a no-lofting hit time of 19s for a non-dynamic target seems reasonably within the expected performance imo.
-edit-
These tables determine the radar scopes max / min range and are irrelevant to the missiles’ actual performance in-game… I can adjust them to say whatever I want which doesn’t help me test the missile.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1161031417950634024/image.png?ex=6536d1c4&is=65245cc4&hm=43cd1081222b979753ce06dad0dfaa6667d488439180e6a7d9a4039aa6e30b83&
Parameters I gave you were Vc ~1020kt at peak. Then it drops as target dives to deck in a right turn, beams and notches. You can see on Vc. TTG is dynamic, once he foxes the ttg is delayed as thats the current ttg in the air. I have no idea if its in TWS or STT, but if its on TWS then track should hold till TAS+55kt. On STT, I would say track is lost as fighter is basically is on deck, same range bin imo.
I don’t know if no-loft can be said on this (9.6NM) case. I say it would, a small amount like in your video as amraams probably use DG as guidance
same parameters as the first shot. Loft, try 10°?
oh ok
The Turn and Run Range looks like a pretty interesting case to test the missile energy for fine tuning kinematics
It didn’t look like a lot but it was a 20+ degree loft in the video.
Also, testing using these kind of dynamic calculated launch zones doesn’t usually net accurate results imo, we’d need to look at legitimate charts to accurately find the performance. I think the fact that it’s within ballpark figures is a good sign.
Same as first one but extend distance to 39km?
Surface launched range against known target speed / velocity is probably the best but rear launch (chase) against a target at altitude 4-5km would be the best to figure how it will perform in-game.
damn, so it really was lacking initially.
yeah, try 20° loft instead of 10°(thought the loft you had was less lel) with the adjusting you did.
With what was done here. And what was done here to get this?
That will never come in near future and this is the probably the only case available at the moment. This DLZ info is quite rich.
I slightly increased the burn time (0.1s) and adjusted the CxK down by 0.05. I also turned off the loft since that’s an easy yes / no line parameter without having to remove a bunch of lines from the missile file.
I’ll test again with the increased range and also the same changes. (With loft this time)
20° loft for a 9.6NM shot …seems quite alot no?
nvm
Lofting parameters in-game are rudimentary as I stated.