Yes, for 5th generation fighters lol. especially since low observability is not so low observable anymore. When facing emerging COMPETENT technological threats such as China.
As well as latest variations of strategic fighters such as the F15 EX lol.
“ideal launch conditions” have always been supersonic. It’s not for the sole reason that it improves kinematics. This conversation is irrelevant to the game anyway… as you said. Most people are going to be launching at or around mach 1.2-1.3 in-game especially with Russian fighters.
1 Like
If you’re going to be making these ridiculous assertions about what I believe at least read what I said first. I stated that the AMRAAM had made vast improvements in reliability over the SPARROW already. This would surely indicate that this is a 90s+ thing… though I’ll still assert that these missiles really aren’t any more or less reliable simply because they are launched in supersonic regions.
Actually, to be honest I think launching them subsonic and forcing them to adjust their guidance to account for instability in a larger and more dynamic region of flight would cause more issues than just launching them over mach. This is supported by the design of the R-77 wherein the missile has a very serious concern about it’s own performance when launched at or below transonic regions. Even missiles like the AIM-54 had issues early on with stability depending on speed and AoA that required a much more dynamic guidance system than earlier missile designs.
I mean, it’s obviously just subtle trolling and you’ve admitted as much in the past… but it’s below you. I think you should consider it beneath you as well. Since you decided to make such an absurd comment I’d like to remind you that in spite of such an accusation, you REALLY didn’t actually understand pulse repetition frequency until you began making baseless assumptions in this thread. You shamelessly re-asserted new (slightly more correct) but ultimately still heavily biased and ignorant statements.
You’re continuing to do so even now, if you would build a base or platform from which to assert your opinion backed by sources it would at least be productive. Instead you’ve reduced yourself to a troll. This isn’t the place for this behavior. You’ve been warned enough times already, I don’t wish for you to get yourself muted or have your ability to discuss on the forum revoked simply because you harbor ill feelings towards me.
…
This argument makes no sense.
How is a missile (which already accelerates to mach 3+, and is designed to handle 20g+ manouvers) going to have any negative effects whatsoever from being launched at mach 1+?
Like aerodynamic heating maybe? But they already do mach 4 how is another ~.5 mach increase going to do anything?
2 Likes
Its LITERALLY your own damn chart. Arguing with you RU fanboys is like speaking to a fking wall ffs:
If the math is a little too hard for you, here you go;
1400m/s - 500m/s = 900m/s
EVEN IF you wanna argue the launch speed is “not quite 500m/s” its at worst 480m/s, and nothing you say actually even disproves my point.
Stop wasting time with all this off topic garbage
1 Like
Did you read what he said?
Also my calculations show approximately 942 m/s DeltaV for the missile, which seems to mean it is accurate.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1156344222530670703/image.png?ex=6514a0fa&is=65134f7a&hm=70451a8a51f19014dd2cd8c9616522e9534fbe8ee108e02ced5bb1b87726252c&
I’ve done similar stuff for the AIM-120 and seen based on public information anywhere from 833 to 904 m/s deltaV configuration and I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH how this is irrelevant when comparing two different missiles of two different sizes with different burn profiles and different aerodynamic characteristics such as grid fins vs conventional fins.
It makes no sense to those who have no knowledge of the forces applied to the launch platform itself. When a missile sits on a rail flying the speed of sound. The missile will buffet. You can actually jam the missile and it will ignite and not separate. Thats why to release at such speeds you must be at a high altitude. It is a delicate process for SUPERSONIC separation. With failure rates increasing the lower you are in the dense atmosphere.
That is why certain aircraft were designed to drop them instead.
All you know if video games like my dear friend.
“the missile flies fast already!” is their argument. lol.
I like how this “0.9 to 1.2 mach” number has been completely pulled out of your ass despite evidence indicating that the transonic choke effect actually extends across a much wider drag range. I.e. this NASA study you can see the onset of the effect in wind tunnel studies around Mach 0.75 in the axial drag coefficient section, and this USAF study shows a similar onset. The effects of this fade but they don’t vanish until high supersonic speeds(above Mach 2).
2 Likes
Please cite sources and provide any reason to give you benefit of the doubt.
Generally stuff closer to the airframe drops to avoid smoking up the intakes and wing mounted stuff goes off rails since it isn’t as much of a concern.
Please reference the sources shared previously by the Russians on their own missiles.
Source, then? Like we can see both the papers I listed and references in those papers give a onset range from around 0.75-0.82 mach and a fade until around 2.0-2.5 mach. Aerodynamics is the same for everyone and there’s a considerable body of research in the US literature on grid fins.
the best study in Belotserkovsky’s book
1 Like
Which what, I am supposed to go buy and trust that it proves how wonderful grid fins are, sight unseen?
I don’t know, it’s your choice, you can model the missile like I did
Yes, because some random person on the internet is comparable to NASA/USAF studies on the subject? Yeah right, pull the other one.
2 Likes
Yo, bbc. Let’s keep it real though. The only reason you support anything my bud has to say is because he is not undermining soviet weapon systems. The second he does your honeymoon is over with.
I’ve been buffing a metric shit ton of NATO equipment such as Magic 2, Phoenix lately and you ignore that conveniently because you think I report only in biased manners. The only person here who has a bias is you, against me for reasons far more personal than game or forum related. Stop stooping to this level, as I said, it’s beneath you.
I am for objectivity
1 Like
He does not know that shhh. There you go.
The Russian document is better sourced for the Russian missile than is the American ones imo.