I would still include air estimates… could see Gaijin just giving it a 20km range because of only the hard data on VL xD
The mach 3 figures is for the VL-MICA with an initial speed of 0 and an maximum speed of mach 3.
We have a Delta-V (End Speed - Initial Speed) of around 1000m/s.
The 900 DV with a Mach 4 maximum speed is for an air launched missile where the plane that launch the missile is already above Mach 1. So the DV is (Mach 4 - Mach 1+) which make it around 900m/s or so.
For reference, the Aim-120A/B is said to have a range greater than 15km but under 20km when launched from the NASAMS.
The AIM-120C5 is around 25km and the AIM-120C7 is around 30km.
The AMRAAM-ER (ESSM with an AMRAAM homing head) has a range around 40/50km.
Source:
Well, would be good to find a primary source saying as much. I’ll have to dig around. If what you say is true, then we should know that the MICA EM is better in terms of range kinematically. However, AIM-120A may be able to have higher lofting trajectory and more guidance time allowing it to travel greater ranges although that might not matter too much.
Tbh; I think the in game DV value should be 750 from what I’ve seen.
I’m seeing more than 750 DV…
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1145369373159202917/image.png
This information is pulled from the Czech calculations / source.
1 Like
Single stage motor; why does yours have a sustainer?
Because it models the differences in thrust over time that single stage motors have. Even single stage motors ramp up in thrust to peak before going back down, so the Czech Republic Department of Air Defense took that into account to have accurate modeling.
Mica NG is dual pulse; but it seems the original Mica is single pulse with a DV of 750m/s.
Which data is this Czech source?
MBDA repeatedly understates a missile’s capability early on before releasing more information or more accurate information. It once said MICA has 12km in VL, but overtime admitted to it having 20km in VL. I posted proof of this above. It’s the same for Meteor where they initially claimed 100km range before going up to 200km
Take a look at this post. Explains everything hopefilly.
1 Like
Rangers are usually more variable/dependant than a motors velocity increment. I think that’s quite a good indicator of performance.
1 Like
This also makes sense, at 12km G-Pull drops to 30g’s, this indicates the missile is no longer burning/utilising TVC at this range, suggesting a relatively short burn time and therefore 750m/s seems fitting.
1 Like
Well, I’m not exactly sure myself. I presented everything in a report for devs to figure out and calculate it. So we’ll see how it is when it comes to the game.
MICA is 160mm missile, AIM-120 is 177.8mm. The AIM-120 will be higher drag by design of the wings as well as caliber.
The MICA has approximately 11% less propellant than the AIM-120, but the AIM-120 is 32% heavier.
The result is 26.7% more DeltaV for the MICA (at 1152 m/s)… this makes sense to me based on the design. There are a number of other factors but under any circumstances, just knowing the size of the missile and propellant mass alone is sufficient to say that it has to be above 750 m/s. There’s simply no way the MICA has such a low overall DeltaV.
7 Likes
Do we have masses of both propellants?
We have the AIM-120’s propellant mass from a primary source. The source from the Czech report states around 41.88kg for the MICA which is 100% believable based on the size of the propellant section of the missile and in comparison to other similar missiles.
Here is the reasoning I have for believing the MICA should have >750 m/s deltaV
Spoiler
The R-73 and PL-8 for example are similar weight missiles of similar caliber. (Pulling in-game data for these missiles right now).
MICA has ~41.88kg propellant weight
R-73 has 34kg propellant weight
PL-8 has 38.7kg propellant weight
Yet both R-73 and PL-8 exceed 800 m/s DeltaV and approach 900 m/s deltaV.
MICA’s propellant weight accounts for 37.4% of it’s overall mass.
R-73’s propellant weight accounts for 32.4% of it’s overall mass.
PL-8’s propellant weight accounts for 31.9% of it’s overall mass.
In conclusion, the MICA’s assumed propellant weight of 41.88kg would put it’s fraction of propellant weight higher than other missiles of similar size. Those missiles of similar size and with smaller fractions have a DeltaV approaching 900 m/s and therefore the MICA’s could be no less.
This is based on the Czech report’s propellant weight of course.
Also to reference Adrien’s post, the NASAMS AIM-120 had a range of ~15km. The MICA-VL has a range of ~20km.
If we then do the math from the Czech source, 20 km / 15km = 1.33 (33% increase in range from MICA to AMRAAM) when surface launched. The MICA has 11% smaller caliber, and a claimed DeltaV of 1152 vs the AIM-120s calculated 908.9.
That shows a 26.7% increase in DeltaV over the AIM-120 and an additional 33% increase in range. This perfectly matches both the claimed DeltaV of 1152 m/s for the MICA and the 11% reduction in caliber (and therefore lower drag). @Fireball_2020
1 Like