Damage model

They're probably just trying to figure this one out :) It might also be a bit lower priority. Not a huge deal, just needs a bit of patience. As you see they definitely get around to a looooot of stuff.

Just sometimes your say, pet issue might not get dealt with in a timeframe you'd want, and that sucks - believe me I know! But there's nothing to do but wait :)

Yea I guess, would still be nice to at least get a statement on this though.

F15 and Su27 takes 0 Damage when going over runway craters.

Literally 0, no bump, nothing.

I will do testing in a controlled enviroment at some point hopefully, I hope that can bring some light in here. Since I am really barely staying up and I am getting a feeling that there is something fishy happening if people have higher RTT then the rest.

Dunno. Numbers will tell.

One does not have enough data to effectively compile into a neutral opinion. Usually at least.

Why is it then that every F-15/Su-27 that I hit goes down with one missile but only the M-2000 doesn't. It's clearly not netcode related, it only happens to the mirage.

Easy :

1) FC3 damage models are very simple compared to fully simulated planes. You should try some Mig-21 vs F-5 servers, you'd be surprise how many missiles these jets can take and still make it home, with a good bunch of failures.

2) F-15 and Su-27 are 2 big planes with way more fragile wings than the mirage, making them easier to damage.

Combine both and you get what's considered a kill way more often than it should be.

It's not only the mirage that behave like that but every fully simulated plane / helo ;)

Easy :

 

1) FC3 damage models are very simple compared to fully simulated planes. You should try some Mig-21 vs F-5 servers, you'd be surprise how many missiles these jets can take and still make it home, with a good bunch of failures.

 

2) F-15 and Su-27 are 2 big planes with way more fragile wings than the mirage, making them easier to damage.

 

Combine both and you get what's considered a kill way more often than it should be.

 

It's not only the mirage that behave like that but every fully simulated plane / helo ;)

LOL, no. How in your logic would big planes be more vulnerable than small ones? And how do you know their wings are "way more fragile"? And for the MiG-21/F-5 argument, you do realize there is a difference between a small R-60 and an AIM-120?

The mirage is a small, single engine fighter. It should go down with one MRM and it doesn't. The problem is very obvious.

It should go down with one MRM and it doesn't.

Where did you got this information ?

Where did you got this information ?

Not from hollywood movies and cartoons

My question still stands.

You can test it

Take an F-14 or MiG-31 firing a AIM-54 or R-33 at the F-5, MiG-21, Mirage, F-15 and Su-27, which are getting flown by you

Get yourselfe hit by the missile and look at the damage it will create

then get to the next level, R-77, R-27, AIM-7 and AIM-120, and see again what damage they'll do

if only the mirage survives those missiles, then there is probably something weird there, and testing would be the best way to confirm this

There is plenty of real life MRM employment to go on, both in testing and actual combat. It is very, very unlikely that any aircraft would survive a direct MRM hit - even with smaller warheads the chances are quite poor (eg. typical dogfight heat-seeker).

You can do your research on dtic.mil or on the internet in general - look at how many MRM hits correlate with aircraft destruction. In modern times, it's pretty much all of them.

Where did you got this information ?

Oh just the wild guess that a ~20kg continuous rod warhead should be able to deal with a fighter sized target...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/AIM-9_hitting_QF-4B_at_Point_Mugu_1974.jpeg

Mind you, these are from the AIM-9 which has ~9kg of explosive...

But maybe you're right and the M-2000 is somehow special and will just withstand such a force.

There is 0kg of warhead in your first link. Instead of the warhead they have a telemetry package.

There is 0kg of warhead in your first link. Instead of the warhead they have a telemetry package.

Shhh some ppl in here might think this is impossible.

There is 0kg of warhead in your first link. Instead of the warhead they have a telemetry package.

Even better, then it was a kinetic kill :smilewink:

Maybe you are right but anyway 90% of the time the 2000 is killed by any missiles and zeus said that the DM was finished.

if you would read my last post, then you guys would know what would bring this thread forward and would improve the future of the DM of the Mirage

Maybe you are right but anyway 90% of the time the 2000 is killed by any missiles and zeus said that the DM was finished.

It's not 90%, and even that would be too often. And if the current damage model is seriously considered "finished" it says a lot about RAZBAM's quality control...

There is plenty of real life MRM employment to go on, both in testing and actual combat. It is very, very unlikely that any aircraft would survive a direct MRM hit - even with smaller warheads the chances are quite poor (eg. typical dogfight heat-seeker).

You can do your research on dtic.mil or on the internet in general - look at how many MRM hits correlate with aircraft destruction. In modern times, it's pretty much all of them.

You're right. But I don't think DCS World's Fox 3 guidance is as effective as in real life.

In DCS it's a simple form of PN AFAIK, which is used by most heat seekers in RL in general and by just about all missiles before 70s - though RF missiles would also take closure as input for PN in addition to target LOS rate.

After that, MRM guidance became more complex. Different algorithms for each phase of flight and launch mode, different algorithms for vertical and horizontal channels etc.

Wags did say that they have a person working on missile guidance, so we may see some interesting things :-)

Sent from my P01MA using Tapatalk

I am very surprised how much discussion this topic creates.

Imho it is completely indiscussable. Everyone who flies MP has noticed the Mirage survives at least 75% more hits than all other planes (A10 and su25 are heavily armored exceptions).

It has created more dispute than the Su27s wings ripping off ...

Razbam, can you please just adjust the damage model so it is not way stronger than all others so we can fly MP without having this permanent discussion going on with people bashing each other in chat?

Thank you very much.

Witnessed Deadbeef putting a Vikhr (!) into Mirage yesterday online. Not only it survived the hit of an anti-tank missile, it continued fighting...

Well he turned in front of me, so i had plenty of time to lock him up and send a Vikhr. It hit, he sent a S530 which went below me, he turned around and hit me with another S530D which brought me down. Him staying alive was not so much the reason of the post, but the pointless discussion that evolved after, where everyone is a weapons expert.

My point is:

What really sincerely bothers me, is that this topic creates dispute where there should not be any kind of dispute. If all fighters would have a rather similar damage-endurance we would not have this discussion. People who get along well otherwise suddenly start to fight over each other, the ones pro the current DM are usually Mirage Pilots, the ones against it are non-mirage pilots. This is not a good situation in a community and should be addressed in my opinion.

That said, if you want my opinion about realism: a head on hit with a vikhr that leaves the mirage virtually undamaged apart from a dead engine does not sound very realistic to me ... (according to wikipedia the vikhr is impact-fuzed, not proxy, dunno if this is correct)

edit: I just read some more on the vikhr fuze, while the box at the (german) wikipedia said impact-fuze, the text said it has a proxy fuze for A2A, which I guess was active since I did set the weapons mode to A2A (not head on, dont have that bound to a button) ...

Well he turned in front of me, so i had plenty of time to lock him up and send a Vikhr. It hit, he sent a S530 which went below me, he turned around and hit me with another S530D which brought me down. Him staying alive was not so much the reason of the post, but the pointless discussion that evolved after, where everyone is a weapons expert (the guy discussing most claimed the vikhr "has a laser" and is proxy-fuzed, happened to be the mirage pilot)

 

My point is:

What really sincerely bothers me, is that this topic creates dispute where there should not be any kind of dispute. If all fighters would have a rather similar damage-endurance we would not have this discussion. People who get along well otherwise suddenly start to fight over each other, the ones pro the current DM are usually Mirage Pilots, the ones against it are non-mirage pilots. This is not a good situation in a community and should be addressed in my opinion.

 

 

That said, if you want my opinion about realism: a head on hit with a vikhr that leaves the mirage virtually undamaged apart from a dead engine does not sound very realistic to me ... (according to wikipedia the vikhr is impact-fuzed, not proxy, dunno if this is correct)

I fly the mirage a lot and I love it. But yes, the Damage Model needs rework. The invisible armor is undeniable.

I fly the mirage a lot and I love it. But yes, the Damage Model needs rework. The invisible armor is undeniable.

+1 same for me here

I always said Razbam's Mirage is a flying tank