so Prowler said the 2000-5 will happen ? - Page 13 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-22-2019, 09:26 AM   #121
TLTeo
Member
 
TLTeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 556
Default

If I recall correctly, HB had to get around ED's code to get the AIM-54 to loft properly and also not pull too hard and bleed all of its energy immediately after launch.
TLTeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 10:58 AM   #122
ZHeN
Veteran
 
ZHeN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 5,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsay View Post
The Mistral in DCS has a burn time of 5 seconds reaching a top speed 900 m/s and a 'life time' of 15 seconds.

Please post a track in the correct forum or "M4.5 for 50nm" never happen.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.p...95#post3978395
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.p...61#post3713861
__________________
ZHeN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 11:25 AM   #123
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo View Post
Razbam and HB coded the FM of their own missile (engine thrust, burn time, drag, lift...).
These parameters are parts of each missile definition and can be modified (but you would loose integrity check).
Perhaps I didn't explain myself particularly well (I think we are in agreement ? )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsay View Post
They have control of ...

• missile parameters i.e. mass, burn time, type of guidance, etc.

once launched, they uses the same flight modelling* as ED's own missiles.
The parameters for each are unique i.e. mass, drag, burn time, etc. but AFAIK they use and are limited by ED's missile flight modelling and the parameters/functions it supports.

Obviously the flight profile of a AIM-9 is different from a AIM-120C, 530D, AIM-54, Mistral, etc. as they have differing masses, guidance, thrust, etc. but AFAIK they use the same underling code for most things.

To say Polychop's Mistral flight model is off would IMHO be wrong, one might argue that a burn time was too long, drag is too much/too little, etc. but it's underling FM code is the same as DCS's other IR missiles.

* "same Flight Modelling" is probably better wording than "same Flight Model"
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 11:47 AM   #124
jojo
Veteran
 
jojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: France
Posts: 3,549
Default

You can define:
- type of seeker
- decoy susceptibility
- engine parameter (burn time, thrust, propelant weight)
- max G
- drag profile & lift coefficient (big impact on performance)
- dynamic launch zone
...I'm probably forgeting a few things.
Off course, you are using ED parameters defined for missile behavior.


But overall, if not done properly, you can make an overpowerful missile.
I think everyone is doing his best, missile performances are difficult to find because very secret.
__________________
Mirage fanatic !
I7 7700K/ MSI GTX 1080Ti Gaming X/ RAM 32 Go 2400 Hz/ SSD Samsung 850 EVO/ Saitek X-55 + MFG Crosswind + Rift S
Flickr gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
jojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 11:52 AM   #125
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsay View Post
The Mistral in DCS has a burn time of 5 seconds reaching a top speed 900 m/s and a 'life time' of 15 seconds.

Please post a track in the correct forum or "M4.5 for 50nm" never happen.[/url]
Your Tacview video shows

• a M2.6, 20,000 ft (20,000 - 2,400 = 17,600 ft = 5.4 km) shot
• that starts to decelerate after 5 seconds burn time

Like you, I'd like to see a burn time closer to 3 seconds but Polychop have already set a 3 second burn time in "Mistral.lua" and I don't see what more they could do.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree and move on, as this is OT for the exciting prospect of seeing a 2000-5 in DCS
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 01:50 PM   #126
Nooch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,488
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo View Post
Younger guys with more open mind in the company too.
Talking to a couple of guys working for Dassault, it looks like the "company's mind" hasn't really changed to be honest. They themselves complain about the situation and they find it annoying, even when working as employees.
Nooch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2019, 02:57 PM   #127
CarbonFox
Member
 
CarbonFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 192
Default

Hopefully with AdA involved, development of a -5 module may happen much faster than anticipated.
CarbonFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2019, 11:55 PM   #128
kaoqumba
Member
 
kaoqumba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 263
Default

Will this type of aircraft have air-to-ground radar, anti-radiation missiles, targeting pods, long-range air-to-ground missiles?
kaoqumba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2019, 02:02 AM   #129
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaoqumba View Post
Will this type of aircraft have air-to-ground radar, anti-radiation missiles, targeting pods, long-range air-to-ground missiles?
No, that would be the 2 seat Mirage 2000D.
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2019, 11:48 PM   #130
Mav783
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 84
Default

Ho yeah, a -5 is so cool (fox 3, datalink, etc). But a multi-crew Mirage, mean the D will be super cool also
Mav783 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:29 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.