Jump to content

HWasp

Members
  • Content Count

    296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About HWasp

  • Rank
    Member
  1. I think that FC3 aircraft are not able to abuse this because of the implemented delay (warm up) period. Steadily emitting ECM does not cause this effect in my experience.
  2. Could we just agree, that this is simply a potentially game breaking bug, that currently anyone can easily abuse for complete invulnerabilty against most radar guided missiles? Would be nice if ED would acknowlede this and fix asap.
  3. Tried to make an in-flight test at 2000 m same conditions around M 0,5 This is much less accurate because I did not turn the engines off when trying to measure deceleration in level flight. Anyway I got around 92 kN / engine, while the chart shows around 102 kN, so closer. This difference could be there because I did not calculate with the idle thrust.
  4. Did another test with a low mass of 18206kg (10% fuel) That acceleration showed 85,6 kN per engine, so changing the weight does not produce anything funny, it is just the thrust is less than expected. Does that chart account for the intake fence in take off config? That could reduce thrust quite a bit by blocking some of the air.
  5. I've done a low speed ground acceleration test at close to sea level airfield (Sochi), temperature = 15 C During the test I measured low speed acceleration (flaps up), watching the track at time slowed to 1/8 m = 26821 kg (full fuel no load) max AB acceleration was 5,8 m/s2 after that I measured deceleration at low speed, engines off deceleration engine off (59-45 kts range) average 0,7 m/s2 Using these 2 values: Drag : 18 775N Thrust: 174 337N (174,3 kN) Thrust per engine : 87,15 kN <-----
  6. Tried to roughly calculate average drag values in DCS measuring average deceleration of the missile at sea level, and the drag values don't seem to be vastly different from ones in the table: Between 2800 and 2600 km/h your table suggests around 11000N drag, in DCS it seems to have around 13000N, so more but nothing extremely crazy. What seems really strange in the sim, is that at low altitude the missile hits a fixed speed, and refuses to accelerate any further (around 1700 kts). It reaches that speed very quickly and then it just keeps that. What is the thrust of
  7. Please see the attached track (latest OB), other missiles may be affected. R-27R, 530D (for example) are NOT affected. aim120ecmbug2.trk aim120ecmbug2.trk
  8. Here is a video of coffee being poured into a glass while upside down during a barrel roll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9pvG_ZSnCc Heavy things falling "down" towards the ground is not always true when flying an aircraft! Again, which way the plane should roll, depends on the elevator (G positive or negative), so yes, rolling the same direction inverted can be the correct behaviour
  9. Roll moment depends on your elevator input regardless if you are upside down or not, as long as the G is above 0, lift is created on the wings and the center of gravity is offset due to the assymetric loadout. That means there is an arm created between the 2 forces and that keeps the plane rolling the same direction.
  10. I can't think of any aerodynamic explanation, why the MiG-19 would have such a loss of lift at such a low AoA, also this issue decreases the planes turn performance and handling in a fight seriously. Again, please investigate this!
  11. So, just for clarification: the problem I see is the dip in the CL-Alpha curve at 9.5 AoA. These graphs are usually quite straight up to stall AoA, and 9.5 degrees is pretty far from stall AoA on the MiG-19 (As you can see on the graph, and in the sim as well, it starts around 23 degrees) So this is what a text book example of the graph looks like: Also here is what I would expect it to look like in case of our MiG-19 (the red line instead of the actual measurement)
  12. Hi! I have found the following while testing the MiG-19P turn performance: AoA 9 = 5,8G at 424 kts AoA 9,5 = 6,0G at 424 kts AoA 10 = 5,9G at 425 kts AoA 11 = 5,7G at 426 kts As you can see, G value is at the maximum at 9.5 degrees AoA, after that it decreases at constant speed. See attached screenshots. After this I calculated CL (coefficient of lift) roughly and plotted a graph, which has a strange dip starting at 9.5 degrees AoA. See graph attached. Please investigate!
  13. RWRs do not have complete 360 degrees coverage over your aircraft and you were not flying straight and level. Also the missile will not approach you from straight head-on, it is diving on you from high altitude. And what if your rwr was bugged? (Sry I know, there are no bugs in DCS... :) ) You see? It is not that simple. Go to ME, have an AI fire at you, record the track, watch it from the missile's perspective.
  14. The best you can do is to get Tacview to see what actually happened, and\or make an AI F-14 fire at you in ME and watch the track. Even if you happened to find an actual problem with the missile, you'd still need to present it clearly with a track. AIM-54 has been a mess since release, but those issues are related to guidance mainly, and if they manage to fix them with the new API finally, the missile will still kill you in a situation like that.
×
×
  • Create New...