I think these are primarily issues with the efficiency of lofting and drag of the missile overall as the thrust and performance matches known primary source material given in my OP.
1 Like
yeah maybe, i guess we’ll see how the dev’s interpret it
The data will be hard to extrapolate without knowing the loft parameters.
extrapolation in what sense?>
If they match known performance metrics with terrible loft logic it can lead to over / under performance. Extrapolating the correct drag figures will be more difficult for lofting missiles than non-lofting since this data has to be extrapolated.
this is why careful tuning will be required, because their is so much info on how it SHOULD perform, i hope they can find a way to make the missile closely match that of the real thing
2 Likes
6000m（20000ft） m1 vs m1
Judging from actual testing, the maximum range of these missiles launched head-on is mainly determined by battery time and flight control bugs…By further extending the launch distance, the terminal speed of the missile will not drop significantly (although the flight time will be greatly increased)
14 Likes
That’s a nice graph! Do you plan on continuing making these as we see changes?
Any reason why you started at 20km and not lower? Usually at 20km or even 15km, at Mach 1, it’s still very possible to defeat these missiles
I tested the launch of missiles at 10 km.These missiles are extremely lethal at 10 km, taking less than 10 seconds from launch to hit.
At the same time, some missiles (derby and pl12) will also loft when launched at 10 kilometers, and at the same time pull out more than 20G overload when they start to dive. I think these situations are because Gaijin did not adjust the missiles properly, so they are not drawn on the picture.
2 Likes
Would you say that manually lofting these MRAAMs would hurt their performance btw?
I mean，these missiles will automatically loft even when launched within 15 kilometers. This not only extends the flight distance of the missile,but also causes the missile to pull out excess overload and consume more energy.
At any reasonable range they already loft way too high, to the point where some of them are coming down almost completely vertically at 40km. Tossing them even higher will only make it worse.
It might be a bug with the inertial guidance, cause I’m not sure how it thinks that the initial trajectory of the plane is that the plane is traveling in reverse while facing head-on to you.
I do wonder if point nose down a bit relative to the target could help mitigate the loft bugs.
It absolutely is a bug, that’s not intentional behavior but even if fixed I doubt manually lofting the missiles will make any significant difference given how quickly they maneuver to their loft trajectory,
With the way lofting is now on the dev server, no it doesn’t help. The loft code is way too aggressive and regardless of attitude at launch the missile will still go into its 20-25 degree climb
Does these 2 models have any significant differences?
One says B, the other says A.
1 Like
So you mean there is no actual differences between these 2, right?
Touching back on this, it appears this chart is very misleading. Testing seems to confirm what I had been saying about the R-27ER in the conditions mentioned. Even in the charts posted, the R-27ER is superior to the AIM-120 even when it isn’t lofted. By the way, the MiG-29SMT can notch at nearly 90 degrees while guiding the R-27ER whereas whatever is using AIM-120 can’t… so to pretend they remain head-on as my scenario does is to unfavorably benefit the AMRAAM launcher.
Correct. There is only one missile file, the AIM-120B is a texture only iirc.
The AMRAAM launch aircraft could probably break lock, and crank / turn cold and then require for terminal homing (or just let it continue on it’s way to go active), and of those equipt with an IRST aren’t going to struggle with losing the target due to notching & chaff, few will probably also remember to deploy Flares as well once they are given dedicated deployment key binds.
it seems that the R-27 would have the advantage at closer ranges where the TTK is too short to allow for significant defensive maneuvers(TTK <= ~9.5 sec), but at longer ranges the AMRAAM launcher will have the time to wait out the launch especially once TTG metrics are being presented.