Jump to content

Aap panel off button doesnt turn it off


sublime

Recommended Posts

Yup part of the eternal dance of BVR, trading altitude and speed for defense or offense:)

 

Well yes. Quite.

But understand i been flying the f14 for a year LOL

I.e. the plane i can launch aim54s at u as soon as my wheels go up.

Also.. i still wonder abr the amraam. Why is an amraam 10x more dangerous unless the sd10 is at mach .9 and 40k? I mean at equal heights fine but i see people "crank"" amraams from say 5k at targets at 20 or 30k and mostly get kills too at 20 ot 30 miles. Ah well.

But the specific tactic you mentioned is the only way you can use those and have any chance against the USN


Edited by sublime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think AMRAAM is 10x or even 2x better. I think it’s loft currently is better optimized then Sd-10, that being said SD-10 has much greater pop up or pop down capability due to higher thrust to weight ratio and greater amount of fuel.

 

So if you test both launches in identical conditions, I think you will no longer say it is 10x better, but that it’s lofting is currently more optimized, and SD-10 suffers from transonic drag more then it should. Once the new API is fully implemented a lot of problems should go away on their own.

 

AMRAAM Cs biggest advantage is counter measure resistance, that is really the only parameter of AMRAAM that could be called multiple times more effective then SD-10.

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i was being hyperbolic

Noway 10x better

2x though? I havent ran tests.. thats the issue

But id say otherwise 100% yes. If i launch an amraam at a target at 15 miles from any altitude it has a very good chance of kill.

This is NOT true with the SD10. If youre fast and high yes. But if youre low and theyre high? Nope. It may very well be correct - perhaps the amraams rocket is way better or runs longer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, if you test or look at LUA rocket of SD-10 has more power, has more fuel, and either burns the same time or a second longer. SD-10 also has dual stage while AMRAAM C is boost only.

 

If you check AMRAAM won’t make so many 15 mike shots at low altitude on the deck like you were firing SD-10, if you go on the deck it’s more like ten miles, here’s a look on altitude and amraam performance attaches below as a picture

 

Range has some big differences depending on altitude and speed, AMRAAM does better at gliding efficiently, new API means it can’t pull as much G and bleed as much speed. So there is differences but all in all the range performance of each missile is pretty similar and well done compared to other missiles in DCS. AMRAAM C can outrange it sure but it’s not a whole lot. It loses less then SD at low altitude.

 

This graph shows 161km range at 50k feet and 25km at 1k ft, max speed goes from Mach 4.7 to Mach 3.8. That’s almost 1/7th the range on the deck! 25km is 13.6nm. So yeah maybe if you fly straight and launch fast it might make 15nm on the deck with the same AMRAAM version, but the target would have to ignore the missile fly straight and have the missile launcher probably supersonic for about a 10-15% boost(Gragh doesn’t mention speed of launch unfortunately so assume it could be off by that much in either direction).

 

I should highlight that gragh does not specify AMRAAM C version, I believe DCS has C-5, this may be C-7. So while these ranges are farther then the AMRAAM C-5 can achieve in DCS, it should give you a rough idea of how much performance they lose at lower altitudes

 

Take them both to on the deck, same speed, and SD-10 will probably make 10 miles in same conditions, and the range gap will go be smaller the higher the faster you go

13503C38-0B9E-493B-AC47-5B0F3993E122.thumb.jpeg.36ec0ddebc9584950b399fd695f3770b.jpeg


Edited by AeriaGloria
Clarify Gragh is likely not same AMRAAM C as in DCS

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, if you test or look at LUA rocket of SD-10 has more power, has more fuel, and either burns the same time or a second longer. SD-10 also has dual stage while AMRAAM C is boost only.

 

If you check AMRAAM won’t make so many 15 mike shots at low altitude on the deck like you were firing SD-10, if you go on the deck it’s more like ten miles, here’s a look on altitude and amraam performance attaches below as a picture

 

Range has some big differences depending on altitude and speed, AMRAAM does better at gliding efficiently, new API means it can’t pull as much G and bleed as much speed. So there is differences but all in all the range performance of each missile is pretty similar and well done compared to other missiles in DCS. AMRAAM C can outrange it sure but it’s not a whole lot. It loses less then SD at low altitude.

 

This graph shows 161km range at 50k feet and 25km at 1k ft, max speed goes from Mach 4.7 to Mach 3.8. That’s almost 1/7th the range on the deck! 25km is 13.6nm. So yeah maybe if you fly straight and launch fast it might make 15nm on the deck with the same AMRAAM version, but the target would have to ignore the missile fly straight and have the missile launcher probably supersonic for about a 10-15% boost(Gragh doesn’t mention speed of launch unfortunately so assume it could be off by that much in either direction).

 

I should highlight that gragh does not specify AMRAAM C version, I believe DCS has C-5, this may be C-7. So while these ranges are farther then the AMRAAM C-5 can achieve in DCS, it should give you a rough idea of how much performance they lose at lower altitudes

 

Take them both to on the deck, same speed, and SD-10 will probably make 10 miles in same conditions, and the range gap will go be smaller the higher the faster you go

I dont know man. I respect what youre saying..and its purely anecdotal and i havent fired a spamraam in a while

But those things ar least until.6 montbs ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, if you test or look at LUA rocket of SD-10 has more power, has more fuel, and either burns the same time or a second longer. SD-10 also has dual stage while AMRAAM C is boost only.

 

If you check AMRAAM won’t make so many 15 mike shots at low altitude on the deck like you were firing SD-10, if you go on the deck it’s more like ten miles, here’s a look on altitude and amraam performance attaches below as a picture

 

Range has some big differences depending on altitude and speed, AMRAAM does better at gliding efficiently, new API means it can’t pull as much G and bleed as much speed. So there is differences but all in all the range performance of each missile is pretty similar and well done compared to other missiles in DCS. AMRAAM C can outrange it sure but it’s not a whole lot. It loses less then SD at low altitude.

 

This graph shows 161km range at 50k feet and 25km at 1k ft, max speed goes from Mach 4.7 to Mach 3.8. That’s almost 1/7th the range on the deck! 25km is 13.6nm. So yeah maybe if you fly straight and launch fast it might make 15nm on the deck with the same AMRAAM version, but the target would have to ignore the missile fly straight and have the missile launcher probably supersonic for about a 10-15% boost(Gragh doesn’t mention speed of launch unfortunately so assume it could be off by that much in either direction).

 

I should highlight that gragh does not specify AMRAAM C version, I believe DCS has C-5, this may be C-7. So while these ranges are farther then the AMRAAM C-5 can achieve in DCS, it should give you a rough idea of how much performance they lose at lower altitudes

 

Take them both to on the deck, same speed, and SD-10 will probably make 10 miles in same conditions, and the range gap will go be smaller the higher the faster you go

 

Not sure why on paper it is supposed to be so good and in actual gameplay it turns into a brick strapped to fireworks.

 

The kill ratios of both missiles in combat are quite clear. These missiles need more work than just a loft profile and chaff resistance number values.

 

These are not ancient arrows that only must follow the glide principle and air resistance profile.

 

By going with each description posted here. Each nut and bolt can significantly alter performance of these missiles.

 

Also we are now off topic.

Current Hangar : A-10C II ¦ AJS-37 ¦ A/V-8B ¦ F-14A/B ¦ F/A-18C ¦ FC3 ¦ JF-17 ¦ Ka-50 ¦ Mi-8 ¦ M2000-C ¦ SA342 ¦ UH-1H

 

Other Modules : Combined Arms ¦ Persian Gulf

 

TRAINED - LEARNING - UNTOUCHED - ABANDONED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why on paper it is supposed to be so good and in actual gameplay it turns into a brick strapped to fireworks.

 

The kill ratios of both missiles in combat are quite clear. These missiles need more work than just a loft profile and chaff resistance number values.

 

These are not ancient arrows that only must follow the glide principle and air resistance profile.

 

By going with each description posted here. Each nut and bolt can significantly alter performance of these missiles.

 

Also we are now off topic.

Well i was wrong. Somewhat

.mostly. if.youre at altitude and speed theyre quite deadly

Howeber the oxygen issue

 

Thsts a bug. @ aeria gloria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...